64 replies to this topic

[MrMadguy]

We will be able to get rid of map voting only when we'll get rid of badly designed maps. PGI themselves created this problem, when they started to waste their resources on fixing/making maps without taking their core game mechanics into account - just for the sake of providing different environments and just slowing matches down via turning game into "WalkFor5MinutesWarrior Online". I'm not sure, why it was done. My theory - to cater to Light 'Mechs via making them more "meaninful". It was really bad idea.

[GARION26]

pbiggz, on 04 May 2021 - 11:15 AM, said:

Yeah im calling you on that. A big part of mechwarrior in the past was fitting your mechs based on the environment you were going into. Cool builds for hot biomes. Ranged builds for wide open spaces, brawlers for cities, etc.

That kind of planning is completely lost in mwo, because you cant alter your mech choices before a match, AND environmental effects have been nerfed down to like 5% of their original effect.

Letting people choose builds meant to perform on a certain map would add alot of diversity and alot of decision making AND allow teams to coordinate before a match to figure out what needs to be brought. A big part of old school comp gameplay was balancing the team's loadouts to complement one another, and that is completely not present in current quickplay.

I fully reject any suggestion that a dropdeck or pre-match lobby would reduce the quality of the game. You're just scared of the idea of change, since the game has changed so little for so many years, and in the past the changes were not good. We need to be asking for more, and better, not the same, or less because we're cynical about PGI.

What makes sense for a solo player PVE is different then a 24 player PVP system. What's intriguing in PVE is potentially different the PVP.

If you are going to reject any suggestion that disagrees with your premise it's hard to have a conversation.

Would you say faction play games are better because you can build for the map? Or are they 'better' because people tend to be in units and coordinate.

Knowing your map and having drop decks favors people who have a bigger stable of mechs. Is that the best choice for the quick play experience.

As others have pointed out making a mech work on whatever map you happen to drop with (and with whatever random mix of team mates you happen to get) is actually part of the unique challenge of quick play.
I'd build mechs differently if I always knew I'd always get the perfect map for it.
I'm not sure I'd enjoy the game more though if every time I hit mining collective everyone was a brawler and every match on polar featured 24 players with PPCs and LRMS

[ScrapIron Prime]

DAEDALOS513, on 04 May 2021 - 11:25 AM, said:

I'm from the school that says 'i will make my build work no matter the map using good positioning, comms and skill..' This is how i've gotten good at this game.. by playing all builds/all chassis/clan and IS and WITHOUT VOTING.

This is it kids, this is how you eat your Wheaties. Either play generalist builds that have no real weaknesses OR learn effective use of cover, communication, and positioning... the hard way.

Edited by ScrapIron Prime, 04 May 2021 - 11:45 AM.

[pbiggz]

ScrapIron Prime, on 04 May 2021 - 11:44 AM, said:

This is it kids, this is how you eat your Wheaties. Either play generalist builds that have no real weaknesses OR learn effective use of cover, communication, and positioning... the hard way.

So you are ok with no build diversity? You're running around in circles here because the argument against a lobby is that it will "get rid of diversity of builds" but in order to perform without it, you need generalist builds that all do the same thing just in case you get a bad map.

No. Sorry guys you're wrong.

[McGoat]

DAEDALOS513, on 04 May 2021 - 11:02 AM, said:

Snip

Thankfully your opinion, and the opinions of those you surround yourself with, has little to no merit or acceptance in the broader community.

[DAEDALOS513]

McGoat, on 04 May 2021 - 01:13 PM, said:

Thankfully your opinion, and the opinions of those you surround yourself with, has little to no merit or acceptance in the broader community.

.. more evidence why cauldron and the likes of you should not be directing the game.. you're not only slighting me but all those that agree with me.. your ego is off the charts.. pathetic

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 04 May 2021 - 01:28 PM.

[McGoat]

DAEDALOS513, on 04 May 2021 - 01:22 PM, said:

.. and this is the exact reason why cauldron and the likes of you should not be directing the game.. you're not only slighting me but all those that agree with me.. your ego is off the charts.. pathetic

I have no association with the cauldron; your preconceived bias is clear in that regard though.
Good job.

[DAEDALOS513]

McGoat, on 04 May 2021 - 01:27 PM, said:

I have no association with the cauldron; your preconceived bias is clear in that regard though.
Good job.

My apologies.. but we still haven't seen a list of who is in the cauldron despite numerous requests..

You do however have the same unmistakable arrogant tone..

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 04 May 2021 - 01:34 PM.

[McGoat]

DAEDALOS513, on 04 May 2021 - 01:30 PM, said:

..figures an emp would love to be able to take their choice of mech.. they love their clan ppc crutch

I actually have the most fun in IS laservom. Keep doing yourself favors with your weird ideas

(yes, I saw that before you tried to edit it out)

Edited by McGoat, 04 May 2021 - 01:35 PM.

[DAEDALOS513]

McGoat, on 04 May 2021 - 01:34 PM, said:

I actually have the most fun in IS laservom. Keep doing yourself favors with your weird ideas

(yes, I saw that before you tried to edit it out)

So why did you reply? I obviously was unsure and removed it.. i'm working on improving myself.. not generalize as much... but unfortunately your reply supports my generalization that compers shouldn't be directing this game.. that they don't view the game from the common mechwarrior's viewpoint and will not listen to them.. wp.

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 04 May 2021 - 01:55 PM.

[John Bronco]

The preferred nomenclature is "compies", tyvm.

[Leone]

pbiggz, on 04 May 2021 - 11:15 AM, said:

A big part of mechwarrior in the past was fitting your mechs based on the environment you were going into. Cool builds for hot biomes. Ranged builds for wide open spaces, brawlers for cities, etc.

That kind of planning is completely lost in mwo, because you cant alter your mech choices before a match, AND environmental effects have been nerfed down to like 5% of their original effect.

Letting people choose builds meant to perform on a certain map would add alot of diversity and alot of decision making AND allow teams to coordinate before a match to figure out what needs to be brought. A big part of old school comp gameplay was balancing the team's loadouts to complement one another, and that is completely not present in current quickplay.

Honestly, might be one of the reasons I prefer CW to Quickplay. I mean, that and the whole teamwork and tactics bit, but this too. Hadn't really considered it before. Good call.

~Leone.

[DAEDALOS513]

John Bronco, on 04 May 2021 - 01:40 PM, said:

The preferred nomenclature is "compies", tyvm.

I go with compers since the preferred nomenclature with most (perhaps older) star trek fans is trekkers, not trekkies..

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 04 May 2021 - 01:47 PM.

[Xmith]

Back in the day dropping in a mission was like a box of chocolate. You never knew which map you were going to drop in.

If I'm not mistaken, way back in the day, the matchmakers task was to have all players drop on all maps. The matchmaker would try to have you drop on all maps an even number of times. The number of drops on all maps was never an even amount but they weren't that far off. There were still times where certain maps would pop up three times in a row. I believe it was trying to even up the drops between all the maps. Based on my map stats, drops on all maps were fairly even back then before map voting was implemented.

[My Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ]

DAEDALOS513, on 04 May 2021 - 01:37 PM, said:

So why did you reply? I obviously was unsure and removed it.. i'm working on improving myself.. not generalize as much... but unfortunately your reply supports my generalization that compers shouldn't be directing this game.. that they don't view the game from the common mechwarrior's viewpoint and will not listen to them.. wp.

[DAEDALOS513]

Xmith, on 04 May 2021 - 02:27 PM, said:

Back in the day dropping in a mission was like a box of chocolate. You never knew which map you were going to drop in.

If I'm not mistaken, way back in the day, the matchmakers task was to have all players drop on all maps. The matchmaker would try to have you drop on all maps an even number of times. The number of drops on all maps was never an even amount but they weren't that far off. There were still times where certain maps would pop up three times in a row. I believe it was trying to even up the drops between all the maps. Based on my map stats, drops on all maps were fairly even back then before map voting was implemented.

That's how it should be.. a box of chocolates. Knowing what map you're dropping on won't do anything to add diversity to builds because everyone will bring similar builds.. how is that adding diversity? Having a variety of builds in each drop adds flavour and spice to a match. Do we really want to see a sky full of ppc or lrm fire? Just like what buffing weapons that didn't need it do, allowing this would be a further dumbing down of MWO and another blow to its' moniker of being a 'thinking mans shooter.' The search for the holy crutch continues I guess..

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 04 May 2021 - 06:29 PM.

[ScrapIron Prime]

pbiggz, on 04 May 2021 - 12:02 PM, said:

So you are ok with no build diversity? You're running around in circles here because the argument against a lobby is that it will "get rid of diversity of builds" but in order to perform without it, you need generalist builds that all do the same thing just in case you get a bad map.

No. Sorry guys you're wrong.

I think you missed the part where I said “OR learn effective use of cover, communication, and positioning...”

Translation... specialist builds need more than just the perfect map to make them effective. Removing or reducing the need for a pilot to learn patience and positioning on a map that is sub-optimal for their build is actually just coddling the player. In my opinion, that’s what single player games are for.

[Maugged]

ScrapIron Prime, on 04 May 2021 - 07:41 PM, said:

I think you missed the part where I said “OR learn effective use of cover, communication, and positioning...”

Translation... specialist builds need more than just the perfect map to make them effective. Removing or reducing the need for a pilot to learn patience and positioning on a map that is sub-optimal for their build is actually just coddling the player. In my opinion, that’s what single player games are for.

It's a real life thing too. And i had no idea that when you don't have a sub optimal build you never needed patience or positionning...

[Teenage Mutant Ninja Urbie]

I'd actually prefer random maps, too.

the current system, along with the maps being how they are, leads to a preference in certain maps, while you rarely see others (looking at you, poor terra; in around ~40/50 matches now, I've seen it TWICE, and only because I had a high multiplier. shame, shame, shame).

random-maps would increase variety in builds by its very nature.

dropdeck-like selecting mechs, while seeing the map like in FW, would be a huge error in QP; it kills variety and you'll see a handfull of optimised mechs per map - oh, and ofc those that do "their own thing" aka bad-things; "flanking the enemy" on polar with a stealth-atlas. well, aside from those, it's monotony for every map.


--> random maps good, ugh. give random maps. CaveUrbie happy then. ugh!

Edited by Teenage Mutant Ninja Urbie, 05 May 2021 - 04:54 AM.

[pbiggz]

ScrapIron Prime, on 04 May 2021 - 07:41 PM, said:

I think you missed the part where I said “OR learn effective use of cover, communication, and positioning...”

Translation... specialist builds need more than just the perfect map to make them effective. Removing or reducing the need for a pilot to learn patience and positioning on a map that is sub-optimal for their build is actually just coddling the player. In my opinion, that’s what single player games are for.

I should clarify, if you can specialize a build for certain conditions, i want those conditions to be punishing. A pre-match lobby and configuration selection should mean things like hot terra therma, dust storms on desert maps, storms that disrupt sensors on grim plexus and the like, snow and dark on icy maps, etc.

This should herald the return of real diverse map conditions, and they should be varied, splashy, and exciting. Maybe one match you get polar highlands on a clear day, and snipers and lrms reign supreme. OR, maybe you get polar highlands in the middle of a midnight winter storm, where the dark and the snow drop your line of sight down to 400 meters, and your sensors (including thermals) down to no more than 600, and you need to send out lights to sniff out the enemy team so you can brawl them, since locks will be few and far between.

But we're getting off the rails here.