283 replies to this topic

[Seth Kalasa]

Guile Votoms, on 24 November 2020 - 05:28 AM, said:

Just reduce Solaris to a 1v1 / 2v2 / 12 player free-for-all arena match without rewards and tiers.
It never needed to be more than that and the reason it's so bloated is why it's dead.

Faction Play improvements are what MWO needs the most.

The feeling when players care about the game more than developers.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Seth Kalasa, on 01 December 2020 - 02:06 AM, said:

The feeling when players care about the game more than developers.

Im can remember me to 2015 ,and a Twitch Video.
In the Mechlab Russ Bullock try by 2 Free Tons to build a PPC in ,and crys while not going...
love all this little old Anecdots

Edited by MW Waldorf Statler, 01 December 2020 - 10:35 AM.

[Voice of Kerensky]

Not sure if I'm writing my proposal in the right topic. Of all the topics, this one seems to me the closest.
Is it possible to create a game store for mechs on the MWO website with an almost fully functional mechlab? Naturally, the site should abolish the possibility of entering the testing ground, perhaps on the site it is also worth giving up the opportunity to change the color of mechs, items in the cockpit, and so on. But the site should be able to save and export the loadouts.
I know we have Smurfy site and others, but this is not quite what you need. In the store inside the game, it is very convenient to implement the ability to quickly compare the quirks of the mechs and the available types of weapons using pop-up characteristics. Smurfy, for example, does not have such an opportunity. In the Smurfys mechlab, you build mech without regard for quirks. And this is not always convenient - you have to open another additional page to get acquainted with the quirks of the chassis. And also raises doubts about the relevance of the quirks that are shown in Smurfy.

[Horseman]

Voice of Kerensky, on 03 December 2020 - 11:22 PM, said:

Not sure if I'm writing my proposal in the right topic. Of all the topics, this one seems to me the closest.
Is it possible to create a game store for mechs on the MWO website with an almost fully functional mechlab? Naturally, the site should abolish the possibility of entering the testing ground, perhaps on the site it is also worth giving up the opportunity to change the color of mechs, items in the cockpit, and so on. But the site should be able to save and export the loadouts.
I know we have Smurfy site and others, but this is not quite what you need. In the store inside the game, it is very convenient to implement the ability to quickly compare the quirks of the mechs and the available types of weapons using pop-up characteristics. Smurfy, for example, does not have such an opportunity. In the Smurfys mechlab, you build mech without regard for quirks. And this is not always convenient - you have to open another additional page to get acquainted with the quirks of the chassis. And also raises doubts about the relevance of the quirks that are shown in Smurfy.

https://mech.nav-alpha.com/ Up to date except for Dervish and the C-Bill versions of MW5 preorder mechs.

[Voice of Kerensky]

Horseman, on 04 December 2020 - 12:25 AM, said:

https://mech.nav-alpha.com/ Up to date except for Dervish and the C-Bill versions of MW5 preorder mechs.

Thanks for the tip! Good site.
Are the quirks on this site constantly updated?
Still, you cannot save the loadout (in MWO format). At least I didn't find this feature.

[Brauer]

Voice of Kerensky, on 04 December 2020 - 01:09 AM, said:

Thanks for the tip! Good site.
Are the quirks on this site constantly updated?
Still, you cannot save the loadout (in MWO format). At least I didn't find this feature.

If you click "Save and share" the client link that it provides can be pasted into the "import" field in MWO.

[Lightfoot]

Maybe this post should have been in Modes and not Maps, but it concerns the repetitive gameplay on Solaris 7 maps. Basically S7 needs long range maps to add variability and normal mech combat situations, but read the post. It's short and to the point.

Edited by Lightfoot, 04 December 2020 - 09:13 AM.

[Darkstrand]

For what it's worth, I am in support of an 8v8 mode. I would rather play with fewer mechs and having a lower time to kill. I prefer it a slower slugfest that feels like a simulation rather than the chaotic matches that are 12v12.

[Brauer]

Lightfoot, on 04 December 2020 - 09:09 AM, said:

Maybe this post should have been in Modes and not Maps, but it concerns the repetitive gameplay on Solaris 7 maps. Basically S7 needs long range maps to add variability and normal mech combat situations, but read the post. It's short and to the point.

Boreal, Steiner, and Factory all work well for longer range mechs. With bans that means you can remove Caves and Jungle from the equation and guarantee a decent map for a ranged mech.

[ParticleProjector]

Match Maker improvement for solo que:

Instead of using current priority of:

• In Group
  
• PSR
  
• Mech Tonnage

Instead use

• PSR, with surcharge if in group
  
• Mech Tonnage (could also surcharge if in group)

Surcharge means multiply by a factor, so if factor is 30%, PSR 1000 is treated as if 1300, PSR 100 as if 130. I imagine the surcharge would be a constant value, but could have different ones for different groups sizes. Can take the average PSR of group if MM can only see the group as a whole.

This doesn't preclude limiting group size and such in solo que, but that would become a weed out step only in selection instead of a team balancing factor.

The point is to still consider if in a group which is important, but also consider that not all groups are good. I also tried to come up with something that I hope is low enough effort to get done.

[Horseman]

Voice of Kerensky, on 04 December 2020 - 01:09 AM, said:

Thanks for the tip! Good site.
Are the quirks on this site constantly updated?

They haven't been updated since the Dervish release, but there haven't been any quirk changes since then either.

Lightfoot, on 04 December 2020 - 09:09 AM, said:

Maybe this post should have been in Modes and not Maps, but it concerns the repetitive gameplay on Solaris 7 maps. Basically S7 needs long range maps to add variability and normal mech combat situations, but read the post. It's short and to the point.

Boreal and Steiner are the mainstay of Div 1 and 2, where AC/RAC spam is pretty dominant

[Voice of Kerensky]

Brauer, on 04 December 2020 - 06:52 AM, said:

If you click "Save and share" the client link that it provides can be pasted into the "import" field in MWO.

Thx!

Horseman, on 04 December 2020 - 12:27 PM, said:

They haven't been updated since the Dervish release, but there haven't been any quirk changes since then either.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. What if the person gets sick or doesn't have enough time to update the mechs database? In this case, a mech built on such a resource will no longer meet the realities in the MWO game itself.

Edited by Voice of Kerensky, 06 December 2020 - 05:10 PM.

[Tamerlin]

Voice of Kerensky, on 06 December 2020 - 05:08 PM, said:

That's exactly what I'm talking about. What if the person gets sick or doesn't have enough time to update the mechs database? In this case, a mech built on such a resource will no longer meet the realities in the MWO game itself.

I agree with VoK. While I appreciate what Smurfy and MechDB have done, I've always thought that any outside-of-the-client information like that should be controlled officially by PGI.

[Horseman]

Tamerlin, on 06 December 2020 - 07:49 PM, said:

I agree with VoK. While I appreciate what Smurfy and MechDB have done, I've always thought that any outside-of-the-client information like that should be controlled officially by PGI.

Unfortunately, the "API" of mech data that PGI did publish at one point hasn't been complete or up to date since years ago.

[NocturnalBeast]

Darkstrand, on 04 December 2020 - 10:46 AM, said:

For what it's worth, I am in support of an 8v8 mode. I would rather play with fewer mechs and having a lower time to kill. I prefer it a slower slugfest that feels like a simulation rather than the chaotic matches that are 12v12.

The game was better with 8v8, it ran better and there was more maneuvering with less death balling and less Nascar. Plus maybe with less Mechs on the field PGI could look back into Inverse Kinematics.

Edited by Ed Steele, 07 December 2020 - 01:17 AM.

[MovinTarget]

How about this. No more simple "match score". There is now a basic score + a specialist score and you pick the specialty of your mech before your queue. Each map has specialty multipliers and/or handicaps. So if you queue to brawl and get Polar Highlands, you'll get some sort of special consideration for trying to brawl anyway, and if you successfully brawl then you a really good score b/c it is unlikely to brawl on that map.

Each map can play like this. Every map has general playstyle advantages, incentivize the ones that are not set up to be viable to stick with it.

One thing I would like to see with specialty scores is that there would also be negatives if you play outside your specialty and lose. Also, somehow, if fire support is not actually "supporting" frontline mechs by firing on their (the brawlers/scouts) targets then they lose points.

[3RoyalStar1]

I would like a 24 vs 24 a more chaotic harder mode that awards more
Also maybe a single player mode
And a pvp testing grounds where you can test mechs that you haven’t bought yet
Against real players but you wouldn’t make any cbills

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Came back to scratch the itch temporarily to come find this most of the list is QoL improvements that have been needed for a minute but I figured I'd dig into the big ones.

Quote

Review / Update Game Modes

As far as game modes go, Incursion/Escort are by far the worst modes with Assault being a runner up.

• Escort would be better if it was more like Protect the President from CoD and allow someone to BE the VIP and have two different extraction points to choose from. The important bit is the two extraction points because it disallows the defending team from camping a single point. The dual points to defend is actually important to any asymmetric attack/defend game mode because of the same reason (I'm looking at you siege game mode).
  
• Incursion, this game mode just has a bunch of distractions and cuts off chunks of the map because of the bases. Being No Respawn makes any game mode that is meant to be primarily won through objective incredibly un-fun because whether we like it or not, we came here to shoot robots. TBH, this isn't so easily fixed and I'd really just prefer this be removed or at least made asymmetric.
  
• Assault, this used to be a decent option to end a match when someone was camping before conquest and domination were added. Since then though this just doesn't feel as good as the other two and a lot of times suffers from rotating to each other's bases. I kinda like the option of removing this in favor of other modes.

I think it is important to remind both everyone in this brown sea and devs that with no respawn game modes, objectives have two sole objectives:

• Force an engagement
  
• Prevent camping

Game modes that try to do more (like make it a main path to victory) will generally make the game unfun because there is less shooting of interesting targets (blowing up stationary or dumb targets you can do in training grounds).


For those that like a more cooperative game mode, a mode similar to Destiny 2's Gambit would be interesting if AI target were at least interesting, but not how you would fit this into the world of Battletech or what assets you would use.

Quote

Solution for Faction Play

Get rid of it. PGI has repeatedly reminded the player base that they are no AAA developer. Even most AAA developers have failed to make an engaging persistent universe that the game revolves around so I'd rather they focus efforts on building rich base game than an under developed base game and persistent universe like we've had for 7 years.

Quote

8v8 vs 12v12

8v8 please for the love of god. There is a reason comp ran 8v8 for a long time and it comes down to it just being more fun and allowing more options on maps (because teams cover less ground), it allows lights to have more room to wander as well which is always a plus.

[The Blood God]

Daeron Katz, on 16 November 2020 - 01:00 PM, said:

In this thread, lets discuss ideas for updating or adding to our current modes in MechWarrior Online, such as:

• Review / Update Game Modes
  
• Solution for Faction Play
  
• Solution for Solaris
  
• General Match Maker Improvements
  
• 8v8 vs 12v12
  
• Solo / Group Queues
  
• Examine Match Scoring (AMS)
  
• Remove 2 Minute Requirement for Reconnection
  
• Private Lobby Updates (More Options, Maps, Host Assignment, More Spectators)
  
• Dailies/Weeklies

game modes

because there is no respawn mechanic the only game you can play is last man standing, occasionally assault and conquest comes down to the cap but that saves searching for the last light shut down in a corner somewhere. i don't see why we cant have respawn like in faction or even better unlimited respawn so you can come back in the mech that you just died in but fresh this would force the issue on the objectives make the matches last 15 mins and would give me more time playing and less time queuing i think that alone would dramatically improve the game many orders of magnitude you'd need spawn camp prevention like pick a drop zone with full radar so you dont drop in the middle of the enemies and get insta gibbed or invincible turret spam at spawn. give me a drop ship to fill for QP i want to play a selection of mechs in a 15 min match. make picking a mech like picking a class in other FPS games it might even stop all the nascar.

match maker and PSR
we need harder de-rank im on my way back to T1 again i don't belong there it sucks all the fun out of the game for me i cant play at that level the tiers need to work like leagues so if the game has 25,000 active players only 5000 of those should be in T1 based on table standings that will keep me and not so great players like me in the middle of the tire system where we belong, as for match making i think that splitting the high from the low tiers is a bad idea just have match maker try to divide the players between the 2 sides evenly based on psr but that's just my opinion i think T5 players could learn a lot spectating the t1s

8v8 ive though for a long time that group queue should be 8v8 and keep solo as 12v12 also i think capping groups at 4 is a good idea

remove penalty for DC all together more often than not players are kicked with out warning from games only to find once they log back in not only did they lose the match but you now have a time penalty for your loss of connection which you had no desire to have or control to stop

[Horseman]

MovinTarget, on 07 December 2020 - 08:19 AM, said:

How about this. No more simple "match score". There is now a basic score + a specialist score and you pick the specialty of your mech before your queue. Each map has specialty multipliers and/or handicaps. So if you queue to brawl and get Polar Highlands, you'll get some sort of special consideration for trying to brawl anyway, and if you successfully brawl then you a really good score b/c it is unlikely to brawl on that map.

Reality: You're slapping complexity on top of complexity. A lot of players will not understand the changes and sink even if they were contributing to the match. Many others will pick whichever is the easiest to game.
TL;DR: this is NOT a solution to any problem.