230 replies to this topic

[C337Skymaster]

Commoners, on 22 September 2021 - 05:10 PM, said:

I support clan tech being buffed to being superior to IS tech if they can only target mechs that aren't being engaged by other targets, they only get to queue if they underbid tonnage on all other people in the queues playing clan mechs, and they get banned from playing clan mechs if they ever run away from a fight and have to go play mech maintenance simulator instead.

And when/if melee gets implemented they aren't allowed to use it or they also get banned.

I'm good with this, so long as Clan Tech goes all the way, and doesn't just get a token buff. *Evil Grin*

I actually misunderstood Critical Rocket in one of his streams, and got an ingenious idea: Since PGI gave everyone C3 for free, and Clans never had C3 equipment, Clans don't get target sharing. NARC and TAG still work as currently, but just locking on a target doesn't illuminate it for everyone. You have to use the equipment. With that done, Clans get un-nerfed back to full strength. Not being able to share targeting data will force Clan LRM boats to get their own locks, but once accomplished, they can bring the ever-loving rain, right down to 0 meters at full damage, with high accuracy. Brawl LRMs. There are several lighter support configurations that bring a NARC/LRM combo that are currently weak up close, but were never supposed to be.

For that matter, if we introduce consumable ammunition, you can simultaneously introduce NARC-compatible ammo, which is supposed to be twice as expensive as regular ammo, just like Artemis ammo. That way, if someone didn't shell out for NARC-compatible ammo, it doesn't matter if there's a NARC 'mech on the field. They can't use it.

[Clay Endfield]

Is there a bug in GAR-E's quirk list?

Why didn't the GARGOYLE-E get +8 structure to the CT? Every other Gargoyle variant that doesn't pack a CT weapon hardpoint got +8 Structure. The Kinwolf, Prime, and D variants paid for their CT weapon hardpoints in Armor and Structure quirks; but the GAR-E doesn't have any CT weapon hardpoints and yet it has identical Structure to the Kinwolf and PRIME.

What gives? It's set of 8 bonuses aren't anywhere near as good as the quirks that the combined GAR-A LT, GAR-D RA, and GAR-E LA omnipods provide, which when combined with the GAR-E RT scores 6 Energy Hardpoints (2x Heavy LL + 4x Heavy ML), which is the same as the stock GAR-E, albeit with better offensive quirks and Armor.

As a GAR-E owner, I'm feeling kind of ripped off here.

Edited by Clay Endfield, 23 September 2021 - 02:18 AM.

[Clay Endfield]

C337Skymaster, on 22 September 2021 - 09:09 PM, said:

I'm good with this, so long as Clan Tech goes all the way, and doesn't just get a token buff. *Evil Grin*

I actually misunderstood Critical Rocket in one of his streams, and got an ingenious idea: Since PGI gave everyone C3 for free, and Clans never had C3 equipment, Clans don't get target sharing. NARC and TAG still work as currently, but just locking on a target doesn't illuminate it for everyone. You have to use the equipment. With that done, Clans get un-nerfed back to full strength. Not being able to share targeting data will force Clan LRM boats to get their own locks, but once accomplished, they can bring the ever-loving rain, right down to 0 meters at full damage, with high accuracy. Brawl LRMs. There are several lighter support configurations that bring a NARC/LRM combo that are currently weak up close, but were never supposed to be.

For that matter, if we introduce consumable ammunition, you can simultaneously introduce NARC-compatible ammo, which is supposed to be twice as expensive as regular ammo, just like Artemis ammo. That way, if someone didn't shell out for NARC-compatible ammo, it doesn't matter if there's a NARC 'mech on the field. They can't use it.

All of that sounds absolutely awful. Why do Clanners beg for even more broken equipment when their gear weighs less, consumes less slots, and doesn't turn their side torsos into suicide buttons?

Think about being a new player, making a casual selection for your first mech, and unknowingly penalizing yourself by depriving yourself of Targeting Data. Not a fun scenario.

How does raising the cost of ammo fix anything? We're running around in customized Cicadas that cost as much as a factory fresh Timberwolf; affordability has zero impact on balance. Hypothetically implementing your suggestion will just ensure that players never use standard ammo; they'll fork out however much they need to in order to optimize their mech. Besides which, NARC specific ammo is more of a nerf to NARC builds, who are already forfeiting a missile hardpoint for a support item.

This isn't Tabletop. Live action competitive FPS require a completely different set of criteria to properly function.

[C337Skymaster]

Clay Endfield, on 23 September 2021 - 02:32 AM, said:

All of that sounds absolutely awful. Why do Clanners beg for even more broken equipment when their gear weighs less, consumes less slots, and doesn't turn their side torsos into suicide buttons?

Think about being a new player, making a casual selection for your first mech, and unknowingly penalizing yourself by depriving yourself of Targeting Data. Not a fun scenario.

How does raising the cost of ammo fix anything? We're running around in customized Cicadas that cost as much as a factory fresh Timberwolf; affordability has zero impact on balance. Hypothetically implementing your suggestion will just ensure that players never use standard ammo; they'll fork out however much they need to in order to optimize their mech. Besides which, NARC specific ammo is more of a nerf to NARC builds, who are already forfeiting a missile hardpoint for a support item.

This isn't Tabletop. Live action competitive FPS require a completely different set of criteria to properly function.

This then fits into my proposed rework of the trial 'mech and loyalty system:

A new player should pick a faction. Any faction. If they don't know anything about them, they can pick one at random. Once they've selected a faction, they have access to every stock 'mech that that faction operated (consider this "enlisting" and being assigned a 'mech from the quartermaster). You can change factions at will with no penalty, and be able to see what 'mechs are available to each faction. Some 'mechs would be universally available (AS7-D, AWS-8Q, STK-3F, MAD-3R, WHM-6R, etc). Some 'mechs would be faction specific (AS7-K, HTM, CHR-3K, DRG, PNT, JR7 would all be Kuritan, for example). You can then sample each and every 'mech in the game without spending anything on any one of them, and without being limited to whichever 'mechs are currently in the trial rotation.

This also puts some emphasis on the different factions, gives them some unique flavor to differentiate them from each other beyond simply Clan/IS, and gives new players unfamiliar with the universe some incentive to start delving into the lore that drives the universe and the game. This should also give new players some idea on WHY the Clans are OP, beyond "the game developers screwed up" (the only development screwup was trying to balance the two factions equipment against each other).

With this done, players can earn loyalty towards their chosen faction at a rate of 1/2 or 1/4 the rate earned in FP (leaving an incentive to play Faction, but giving some purpose to QP, and incorporating some of the story which is SEVERELY lacking in this game).

TT is a simulation. MWO is a simulation. They're simulating the same thing through different lenses. The key here is THEY'RE SIMULATING THE SAME THING. That cannot be forgotten or ignored, but needs to be fully embraced and built upon in order to keep this game from going completely off the rails and becoming unrecognizeable as being related to battletech.

[C337Skymaster]

Oh, and raising the cost of ammo fits when you have to pay to replenish that ammo after every mission. Do you take the cheaper ammo so you have more money left over for other equipment or a new 'mech? Or do you pay for the more expensive ammo to possibly have a better chance at performing well in the coming match? If you're coordinating as a team, then you can make that decision more easily. If you're flying solo, it becomes a bit more of a gamble. It's meant to be a balancing mechanic, after all.

[pattonesque]

We love to make playing the game as unpleasant as possible don’t we folks

[Horseman]

C337Skymaster, on 23 September 2021 - 07:22 AM, said:

A new player should pick a faction. Any faction. If they don't know anything about them, they can pick one at random. Once they've selected a faction, they have access to every stock 'mech that that faction operated (consider this "enlisting" and being assigned a 'mech from the quartermaster). You can change factions at will with no penalty, and be able to see what 'mechs are available to each faction. Some 'mechs would be universally available (AS7-D, AWS-8Q, STK-3F, MAD-3R, WHM-6R, etc). Some 'mechs would be faction specific (AS7-K, HTM, CHR-3K, DRG, PNT, JR7 would all be Kuritan, for example). You can then sample each and every 'mech in the game without spending anything on any one of them, and without being limited to whichever 'mechs are currently in the trial rotation.

This also puts some emphasis on the different factions, gives them some unique flavor to differentiate them from each other beyond simply Clan/IS, and gives new players unfamiliar with the universe some incentive to start delving into the lore that drives the universe and the game. This should also give new players some idea on WHY the Clans are OP, beyond "the game developers screwed up" (the only development screwup was trying to balance the two factions equipment against each other).

With this done, players can earn loyalty towards their chosen faction at a rate of 1/2 or 1/4 the rate earned in FP (leaving an incentive to play Faction, but giving some purpose to QP, and incorporating some of the story which is SEVERELY lacking in this game).

Too late in the game's life cycle.
Yet again your idea is screwing new players hard while making zero difference to established ones. Fact is, PGI is not going to redesign a niche game mode to cater to a fraction of players. Last time they promised anything of the sort, we got the Year Of Faction Play. Remember that?

[D V Devnull]

And now for your Reguarly Scheduled Reviewing And Bug Report from the ever infamous 'D V Devnull' who seems to attract Game Bugs to them like nothing else...

In terms of Reviewing here, it so happens that I just caught wind of the changes to "HPG Manifold: Reborn Edition" and went around to take a look. While I do like the New Bridges on top of the C4/C5 & F4/F5 Door locations, the opinion still sticks in my mind that it would be good to add Bridges over the E6/D6 & E3/D3 Door zones. It would really help this newer HPG Manifold Map to complete that upper loop area, particularly in terms of flow, mobility, and dynamic change of how a Match plays out.

In terms of Bug Reporting about this, there is still a Glitch-type issue at the Bridge over the C6/D6 Door zone. When traversing in one direction, every thing is fine. But, when going the other way, only either a High-Speed Mech or a JumpJet-equipped Mech can make it back across the other direction. In order to enable easy fixing & repair, the Approximate Coordinates of the Glitch are as follows...

2799 — 2429.5 — 274 ... Facing SouthEast @ ~142 Degrees

...and I will just have to hope that Francois (or Matt/Daeron/Mark/etc.) is listening backstage for anything that still needs repairs done on it. May we all look forward to a brighter Match out there on the "HPG Manifold: Reborn Edition" lunar surface.


UPDATE EDIT :: Right after posting this, I went across to the top-side entry zone over in B6 and ran into a similar problem. It's rather trap-like too, unfortunately. For this ugly larger Glitch which should not exist, the Approximate Coordinates are...

2690.5 — 3078 — 263 ... Facing South @ ~190 Degrees

...and it can actually force a Mech which finds itself unable to escape into being forced to drop off the side entirely. This subsequently causes the player's Mech to take Severe Leg Damage which it should never have been cursed with. Consider this note about it as a priority call for fixing & repair in that spot!


~D. V. "interrupting madness on the 1.4.246.0 Patch Thread to bring up something which can be handled & done" Devnull



(p.s.: No folks, I am not trying to be a critic here. I am unfortunately finding spots that disrupt gameplay, and trying to be Constructive about getting them fixed!)

Edited by D V Devnull, 23 September 2021 - 10:07 AM.

[C337Skymaster]

Horseman, on 23 September 2021 - 08:47 AM, said:

Too late in the game's life cycle.
Yet again your idea is screwing new players hard while making zero difference to established ones. Fact is, PGI is not going to redesign a niche game mode to cater to a fraction of players. Last time they promised anything of the sort, we got the Year Of Faction Play. Remember that?

Only thing I remember about the "Year of Faction Play" was the name. As I recall, very little actually happened, as is typical when PGI promises anything.

Also, how is this screwing new players? This gives them access to EVERY 'mech, not just some of them with questionable loadouts. (For the love of God: give the trial 'mechs their lower arm and hand actuators!! At LEAST).

Edited by C337Skymaster, 23 September 2021 - 11:08 AM.

[Clay Endfield]

C337Skymaster, on 23 September 2021 - 07:22 AM, said:

This then fits into my proposed rework of the trial 'mech and loyalty system:

A new player should pick a faction. Any faction. If they don't know anything about them, they can pick one at random. Once they've selected a faction, they have access to every stock 'mech that that faction operated (consider this "enlisting" and being assigned a 'mech from the quartermaster). You can change factions at will with no penalty, and be able to see what 'mechs are available to each faction. Some 'mechs would be universally available (AS7-D, AWS-8Q, STK-3F, MAD-3R, WHM-6R, etc). Some 'mechs would be faction specific (AS7-K, HTM, CHR-3K, DRG, PNT, JR7 would all be Kuritan, for example). You can then sample each and every 'mech in the game without spending anything on any one of them, and without being limited to whichever 'mechs are currently in the trial rotation.

This also puts some emphasis on the different factions, gives them some unique flavor to differentiate them from each other beyond simply Clan/IS, and gives new players unfamiliar with the universe some incentive to start delving into the lore that drives the universe and the game. This should also give new players some idea on WHY the Clans are OP, beyond "the game developers screwed up" (the only development screwup was trying to balance the two factions equipment against each other).

With this done, players can earn loyalty towards their chosen faction at a rate of 1/2 or 1/4 the rate earned in FP (leaving an incentive to play Faction, but giving some purpose to QP, and incorporating some of the story which is SEVERELY lacking in this game).

TT is a simulation. MWO is a simulation. They're simulating the same thing through different lenses. The key here is THEY'RE SIMULATING THE SAME THING. That cannot be forgotten or ignored, but needs to be fully embraced and built upon in order to keep this game from going completely off the rails and becoming unrecognizeable as being related to battletech.

Yeah, I hate the idea of being restricted to a handful of mechs. I hate the entire premise of your suggestion. I'd rather be able to play whatever mech I want with the knowledge of regardless of its faction type, it still retains the ability to fight on parity with other mechs of similar tonnage. TT conversions into VGs are never successful or fun. They're not simulating the same thing at all; TT is source material for mechanics and aesthetics, not a rulebook to be translated into a FPS videogame.


Everything you just listed sounds so incredibly unfun that it would be unappealing to the wider gaming audience; Hell MWO as it is looks massively better for entertainment value than your proposal. Sorry bud, but keep that conversion idea away from me.

[Horseman]

C337Skymaster, on 23 September 2021 - 11:06 AM, said:

Only thing I remember about the "Year of Faction Play" was the name. As I recall, very little actually happened, as is typical when PGI promises anything.

If scaling the mode back and cutting out features counts as "very little". In some ways, FP was worse off after the "Year of Faction Play" than before it.

Quote

Also, how is this screwing new players?

Restricting them with little to no explanation. Not everyone is a lore buff like you, and we get new players who have ZERO knowledge of the BT/MW franchise - down to the point of being unable to tell apart IS and Clan mechs.

Quote

This gives them access to EVERY 'mech, not just some of them with questionable loadouts.

To every mech in their mostly non-viable stock loadouts.

Quote

(For the love of God: give the trial 'mechs their lower arm and hand actuators!! At LEAST).

Lower arm actuators only matter for omnimechs and are blocked by certain weapon selections. Hand actuators don't matter even for omnimechs.

[D V Devnull]

Okay... not sure if I heard someone else complaining about how dark that the Canyon Network overhead image is in the MiniMap/BattleGrid system, but I can most certainly confirm that it was delivered way too dark for use. Whose unfortunate monitor was tuned too bright while taking the image? It should not have been edited to be so freaking dark!

~D. V. "unable to properly view the Canyon Network MiniMap/BattleGrid properly during normal gameplay" Devnull

[The6thMessenger]

justcallme A S H, on 19 September 2021 - 06:09 PM, said:

Now it takes 2-3 Alphas for a light depending and if the are not dead they are well maimed which is what we were after..

Took a few months but the aim has been reached. If they need more adjustments later they will get them like all weapons.

If that's the case, we could probably get back to the 40-degree lock-cone now.

[D V Devnull]

The6thMessenger, on 23 September 2021 - 05:33 PM, said:

<<< snip >>>

If that's the case, we could probably get back to the 40-degree lock-cone now.

That number for the Lock Cone Width sounds larger than it was when I began playing several years ago. It even sounds like a rather exaggerated number. Perhaps a width of 20 degrees would be more appropriate? It definitely would be better than the near-zero degree of Lock Cone Width which we currently have now.

~D. V. "feeling like '6th' is going a little overboard with their Lock Cone Width size request" Devnull

[The6thMessenger]

D V Devnull, on 24 September 2021 - 04:04 AM, said:

That number for the Lock Cone Width sounds larger than it was when I began playing several years ago. It even sounds like a rather exaggerated number. Perhaps a width of 20 degrees would be more appropriate? It definitely would be better than the near-zero degree of Lock Cone Width which we currently have now.

~D. V. "feeling like '6th' is going a little overboard with their Lock Cone Width size request" Devnull

Um, it was 45 degrees: https://mwomercs.com...atch-notes/1910

Quote

Weapon Lock will now be lost at 25 degrees, instead of the previous 45 degree value.

If anything my lock-cone was a smidge less.

Of course it's probably cool to have lock-cone increase with TC, 5% per level would be nice. At Lv7 it's at 60, but hey you gave up 7 tons for that lock-cone size.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 24 September 2021 - 05:01 PM.

[D V Devnull]

The6thMessenger, on 24 September 2021 - 04:23 PM, said:

<<< snip >>>

Um, it was 45 degrees: https://mwomercs.com...atch-notes/1910

<<< snip >>>

If anything my lock-cone was a smidge less.

Of course it's probably cool to have lock-cone increase with TC, 5% per level would be nice. At Lv7 it's at 60, but hey you gave up 7 tons for that lock-cone size.

Okay, then... It would appear that my memory is a bit scratchy. All the madness over the years must have messed with my head, just like how it reduced a 45 Degree Lock Cone to absolutely nothing.

And yeah... Just like you, it seemed to me as well like the Lock Cone was never that large. Although, it happens that I'm realizing my start with anything that was a Lock-On Weapon began on the I.S. Tech side of things. That would mean I didn't really get to tap into Missile-Bending by that much until some point later on, as that was more of a Clan thing to do. Fun stuff, of the kind that one can end up feeling like they miss.

By the way, you have an interesting idea there with the idea of expanding the Lock Cone based on the size of TC (Targeting Computer) which someone has equipped on their Mech to use. With that said, it seems like 60 Degrees at maximum would be a little excessive, when the Mech Config is already starting from a 25 Degrees initial point. Perhaps reaching up to 50 Degrees on the Lock Cone at maximum would be more suitable, and not leave things overpowered. Further, it would have to scale by the Tech Base in addition. Levels of increase for the I.S. would be mathematically more easy, going at 3.125 Degrees for each TC Level active on the Mech which the player is using. On the other hand, the Clans would be ~3.571428 (or in words, a "3-and-4/7ths" value) Degrees for each TC Level actively in play. But thinking about that, it seems like it would be too rough on the Developers to code in properly, and should be adjusted slightly. So then I did a little extra math, and found a spot which works better down there, somewhere at the 50.2 Degrees total maximum line. For the I.S. side, they would get 3.15 Degrees per TC Level in equipment. For the Clan side, they would get a boost of 3.6 Degrees each per TC Level equipped. Basically put, the Clan side gets bigger increments than the I.S. only because we need to manage equality in the final result, but still stick to the I.S. thing about smaller value increments. So that leaves me to ask... Would you like to go start a Feature Suggestion Thread about making the TC increase the allowed Lock Angle for players to use? I think that I would be very likely to come and give a Support to it, with additional feedback if it happens that I don't flatly agree 100% with what your Thread's start proposes.

~D. V. "So the Lock-On Cone really WAS that much before! That TC-linked Lock Cone Expansion is a great idea!" Devnull

[Horseman]

TCs aren't supposed to affect missiles lore-wise, though.

[D V Devnull]

Horseman, on 25 September 2021 - 03:41 PM, said:

TCs aren't supposed to affect missiles lore-wise, though.

While that may originally have been true, this is one spot where we would need to go outside Lore for the sake of making the game reasonable. As it is, the minor boost in Sensor Range on the TCs (that's "Targeting Computer" for anyone else who doesn't know and reads this) has already been put in a state (because of other changes to how Lock-Ons work) that affects Lock-On Missiles anyway. There is no longer a good reason at this point to prevent the allowance of Lock Cone Expansion based on how big a TC that someone has. Heck, we could even give a New TC Effect that narrows Spread by "1% Per Level" based on how big the equipped TC itself happens to be. That would cause people to have to weigh how much Ammo and other stuff which they wish to equip versus how much TC that they want to have at their fingertips!

~D. V. "TCs may not be intended to affect Lock-Ons originally, but no reason to hold them back exists now." Devnull



(p.s.: By the way, you get a 'Like' on your post for bringing up the proverbial "Elephant In The Room" and causing a Constructive Response from me about that little tidbit!)

[Gas Guzzler]

C337Skymaster, on 23 September 2021 - 07:22 AM, said:

This then fits into my proposed rework of the trial 'mech and loyalty system:

A new player should pick a faction. Any faction. If they don't know anything about them, they can pick one at random. Once they've selected a faction, they have access to every stock 'mech that that faction operated (consider this "enlisting" and being assigned a 'mech from the quartermaster). You can change factions at will with no penalty, and be able to see what 'mechs are available to each faction. Some 'mechs would be universally available (AS7-D, AWS-8Q, STK-3F, MAD-3R, WHM-6R, etc). Some 'mechs would be faction specific (AS7-K, HTM, CHR-3K, DRG, PNT, JR7 would all be Kuritan, for example). You can then sample each and every 'mech in the game without spending anything on any one of them, and without being limited to whichever 'mechs are currently in the trial rotation.

This also puts some emphasis on the different factions, gives them some unique flavor to differentiate them from each other beyond simply Clan/IS, and gives new players unfamiliar with the universe some incentive to start delving into the lore that drives the universe and the game. This should also give new players some idea on WHY the Clans are OP, beyond "the game developers screwed up" (the only development screwup was trying to balance the two factions equipment against each other).

With this done, players can earn loyalty towards their chosen faction at a rate of 1/2 or 1/4 the rate earned in FP (leaving an incentive to play Faction, but giving some purpose to QP, and incorporating some of the story which is SEVERELY lacking in this game).

TT is a simulation. MWO is a simulation. They're simulating the same thing through different lenses. The key here is THEY'RE SIMULATING THE SAME THING. That cannot be forgotten or ignored, but needs to be fully embraced and built upon in order to keep this game from going completely off the rails and becoming unrecognizeable as being related to battletech.

C337Skymaster, on 23 September 2021 - 07:26 AM, said:

Oh, and raising the cost of ammo fits when you have to pay to replenish that ammo after every mission. Do you take the cheaper ammo so you have more money left over for other equipment or a new 'mech? Or do you pay for the more expensive ammo to possibly have a better chance at performing well in the coming match? If you're coordinating as a team, then you can make that decision more easily. If you're flying solo, it becomes a bit more of a gamble. It's meant to be a balancing mechanic, after all.

Just stop and get help dude.


Are you missing that virtually every MechWarrior game has strayed from the stuff you are talking about? And they are very much games based on BattleTech. This obsession with this online PVP game being identical to BattleTech lore is just wrong. If you want this crap that you keep talking about, mod MW5 so you have pay for ammo and for different ammo qualities (like how there is different quality weapons) and go to town and enjoy yourself. Mod MW5 so you basically can't get an Annihilator and whatever mech availability changes that you want to make. Requesting to add features like that that just makes the game more punishing to players is sadistic, and nobody wants that. This game should be more focused on the PVP experience but with the BattleTech "setting". Not making it into a whole mechlab economy simulator on top of that to give some players an advantage over others. Especially the old farts that have more then enough money to buy premium ammo regularly while the newer players still building up their mechbays have to buy bad ammo to get by. That's a terrible idea for a multiplayer game, and is really showing your lack of understanding of how to make an enjoyable multiplayer game.

Take that crap to PVE games where it belongs.

[Horseman]

Gas Guzzler, on 28 September 2021 - 09:40 AM, said:

Just stop and get help dude.
Are you missing that virtually every MechWarrior game has strayed from the stuff you are talking about? And they are very much games based on BattleTech. This obsession with this online PVP game being identical to BattleTech lore is just wrong. If you want this crap that you keep talking about, mod MW5 so you have pay for ammo and for different ammo qualities (like how there is different quality weapons) and go to town and enjoy yourself. Mod MW5 so you basically can't get an Annihilator and whatever mech availability changes that you want to make. Requesting to add features like that that just makes the game more punishing to players is sadistic, and nobody wants that. This game should be more focused on the PVP experience but with the BattleTech "setting". Not making it into a whole mechlab economy simulator on top of that to give some players an advantage over others. Especially the old farts that have more then enough money to buy premium ammo regularly while the newer players still building up their mechbays have to buy bad ammo to get by. That's a terrible idea for a multiplayer game, and is really showing your lack of understanding of how to make an enjoyable multiplayer game.

Take that crap to PVE games where it belongs.

Yup, probably worth giving this a watch:

MWO could have been the immersive sim he so covets - if the call to make it so has been made early into development. It did not, and expecting the game to suddenly switch gears to become it is borderline delusional. As a F2P game, it needs to take player retention into account and causing another mass exodus is not something PGI would knowingly do.