52 replies to this topic

[w0qj]

I'm willing to do another legendary founder pack for MWO2
Bring it on!

Meep Meep, on 14 October 2023 - 01:50 PM, said:

...
They crowdfunded the original launch with those legendary founders packs so why not do that again? I'd drop a hundred on an mwo2 founders pack easy. I mean look at how much they took in with the comp pack? If the public had the confidence to drop a combined hundred thousand or so that would go a looong way to pry money out of the owners to match it.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 14 October 2023 - 09:17 PM, said:

But it wouldn't be reality now would it?

It would, as LordNothing mentioned, the current population really has no bearing on the viability of a completely new game which was pretty much my whole point.

The6thMessenger, on 14 October 2023 - 09:17 PM, said:

It being shifting does not really dismiss it, it just says different states and configuration, and the problem is when it is incongruent with what would be a fun experience to the player.

How do you judge how much "fun" players are having exactly? I don't even think you can even correlate fun with balance in any sort of measure even if you had someway to gauge the amount of "fun".

The6thMessenger, on 14 October 2023 - 09:17 PM, said:

Losing isn't it. It's being so utterly helpless it's frustrating. Why even bother to play, when you don't have a chance?

The only builds you could classify as helpless is LRMs and lock-on mechanics are pretty broken so yeah, not really sure what you want. Even if they "fix" LRMs and ECM, NARC is still problematic for similar reasons, lack of counter play. That said, LRM awesomes are apparently doing pretty well in QP so some people are doing well apparently (though no idea who).

The6thMessenger, on 14 October 2023 - 09:17 PM, said:

Comps as the masters of the game abide by what is the optimal and effective, as the current setup suggests. But if they are the same people that says what is and should be optimal and effective, kind of like the same people who is the judge, the jury, and the executioner. There's a conflict of interest, that I do not see to be good. Dismissing "just caters to comp" is just dishonest.

Again, you seem to treat comp as a monolith, they all have differing ideas of where they want the game to be. I'm not saying they don't have blindspots, but at least they understand how the game is played. They are trying to make sure that at least each variant has some build worth taking. I disagree even with some of the things they do (not that I've played comp recently so not sure if I honestly count), but can't really say it is any worse than Paul or Chris did. Paul nerfed basically anything that killed him and Chris tried to normalize all the things which basically nerfed things that never needed nerfing in the first place.

Either way, while I agree lock-on missiles are pretty much an all-around bad experience to play with (at least for me), balance is still low on the totem pole of why people don't play this game. I mean even during its heydey I wouldn't have recommended it and none of it ever had to do with balance.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 15 October 2023 - 08:03 PM.

[foamyesque]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 15 October 2023 - 08:01 PM, said:

The only builds you could classify as helpless is LRMs and lock-on mechanics are pretty broken so yeah, not really sure what you want. Even if they "fix" LRMs and ECM, NARC is still problematic for similar reasons, lack of counter play. That said, LRM awesomes are apparently doing pretty well in QP so some people are doing well apparently (though no idea who).

I've said it before, I'll say it again: Make NARCs more interactive (and less powerful) and LRMs can then be made better. What's toxic is getting hit by a NARC and then needing to sit out the next half-minute or more of a match; even sans LRMs, when everybody on the enemy team knows exactly where you are, you can't really do much of anything.

A reduction of NARC duration, so that NARCs need to expose more often and their targets can get back in the fight faster, is the simplest way to attack this problem. Making the projectile more visible so that people can trace the NARC back to source would also help, as would having it flash a damage indicator on impact.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

foamyesque, on 15 October 2023 - 08:17 PM, said:

I've said it before, I'll say it again: Make NARCs more interactive (and less powerful) and LRMs can then be made better. What's toxic is getting hit by a NARC and then needing to sit out the next half-minute or more of a match; even sans LRMs, when everybody on the enemy team knows exactly where you are, you can't really do much of anything.

Well there is AMS to deal with as well. And all of this only impacts LRMs and ATMs, Streaks are still boned because just how they work. Regardless, without info on why players didn't bother playing or why they churned away from the game, it's hard to gauge what the issue is, but again, I highly doubt balance is related.

[ThreeStooges]

foamyesque, on 15 October 2023 - 08:17 PM, said:

I've said it before, I'll say it again: Make NARCs more interactive (and less powerful) and LRMs can then be made better. What's toxic is getting hit by a NARC and then needing to sit out the next half-minute or more of a match; even sans LRMs, when everybody on the enemy team knows exactly where you are, you can't really do much of anything.

A reduction of NARC duration, so that NARCs need to expose more often and their targets can get back in the fight faster, is the simplest way to attack this problem. Making the projectile more visible so that people can trace the NARC back to source would also help, as would having it flash a damage indicator on impact.

What I love about narc is how useless it is to use. 7 seconds just to fire one. It also take up a minimal of four tons with hardly any ammo per ton. I can fire an er ppc twice before I can fire a narc. It's also super slow and easy to doge. I just go stand by an ecm assult lrm/sniper when or if I ever get hit by one. It's like an instant off switch.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 15 October 2023 - 08:01 PM, said:

It would, as LordNothing mentioned, the current population really has no bearing on the viability of a completely new game which was pretty much my whole point.

And the point was, it's holding this game back. Go read the responses again, and where it started.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 15 October 2023 - 08:01 PM, said:

How do you judge how much "fun" players are having exactly? I don't even think you can even correlate fun with balance in any sort of measure even if you had someway to gauge the amount of "fun".

The part where I did my best, and is correlated to the result.

I would say, high match score, because it is indicative of being able to do something during a match. The higher you have, the more things you must have done. Sure there will be trolls trolling, but that's not the norm either -- people generally do their best.

Of course that is just my guess, subjective trying to cling to objectivity, but it works on the assumption that being able to do one's best is fun.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 15 October 2023 - 08:01 PM, said:

The only builds you could classify as helpless is LRMs and lock-on mechanics are pretty broken so yeah, not really sure what you want. Even if they "fix" LRMs and ECM, NARC is still problematic for similar reasons, lack of counter play. That said, LRM awesomes are apparently doing pretty well in QP so some people are doing well apparently (though no idea who).

IDK who TF are doing well with homing missiles in QP T1 TBH. I'm no expert sure, but the lack and paltry presence of it in my games kinda says something else.

And I didn't say builds, I said helpless. As in like dropping with a bunch of uncoordinated QP vs pro comp that knows the game well -- that the match was already decided before it even started. I don't like abandonment, but quite frankly at that point, at times I would have prefered to abandon.

Yes, Match Maker. But you know what, it can be alleviated by alphas being not so punishing. It can be alleviated by Homing Missiles a little less frustrating to use. Etc. Etc.

Less frustration, loose tolerances would do a lot.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 15 October 2023 - 08:01 PM, said:

Again, you seem to treat comp as a monolith, they all have differing ideas of where they want the game to be.

And again. If you don't want part of the blame, don't defend them, don't identify with them. It's that simple.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 15 October 2023 - 08:01 PM, said:

I'm not saying they don't have blindspots, but at least they understand how the game is played.

They know how it is played, yes, I agree. But how it is played is derived with the current balance, sorta like the chicken before the egg, that they have the foresight of what would be the result of things if something were swayed into one way. "how it IS played" is a matter of result of the balance setup -- as in it should come after.

But the contention is it SHOULD be played, and I would say it should be played based on how the common casual will find it appealing, that the contribution of Comps, with their ability, is to get to this balance setup where the casuals would find it appealing. But what actually happens is that, they tweak the balance to the result they will like.

tl;dr, the issue is not as much as they know HOW it is played, but an issue of how it SHOULD be played, and people have different ideas. Problem is that it is now directed by the comp people, with comp bias brought by their environment.

And the least they could do is be honest about it, to admit the bias and catering. That's all I ask.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 15 October 2023 - 08:01 PM, said:

They are trying to make sure that at least each variant has some build worth taking.

And I agree. But based on what metric tho? On what they think it should be, and **** everyone else who think otherwise.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 15 October 2023 - 08:01 PM, said:

I disagree even with some of the things they do (not that I've played comp recently so not sure if I honestly count), but can't really say it is any worse than Paul or Chris did. Paul nerfed basically anything that killed him and Chris tried to normalize all the things which basically nerfed things that never needed nerfing in the first place.

Forget about Paul. Forget about Chris. Their criticism and vilification doesn't mean venerating what Paul or Chris did. That's really just a red herring.

The Cauldron has the control, they decide what the balance it now. Simply saying, "it's worse before" doesn't justify what is bad and insidious now.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 15 October 2023 - 08:01 PM, said:

Either way, while I agree lock-on missiles are pretty much an all-around bad experience to play with (at least for me), balance is still low on the totem pole of why people don't play this game. I mean even during its heydey I wouldn't have recommended it and none of it ever had to do with balance.

Well, that's your prerogative. Let's just agree to disagree.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 15 October 2023 - 11:33 PM.

[Curccu]

ThreeStooges, on 15 October 2023 - 09:35 PM, said:

What I love about narc is how useless it is to use. 7 seconds just to fire one. It also take up a minimal of four tons with hardly any ammo per ton. I can fire an er ppc twice before I can fire a narc. It's also super slow and easy to doge. I just go stand by an ecm assult lrm/sniper when or if I ever get hit by one. It's like an instant off switch.

Looks like you have never encountered good narc light pilot with rest of the LRM lance...

[foamyesque]

ThreeStooges, on 15 October 2023 - 09:35 PM, said:

What I love about narc is how useless it is to use. 7 seconds just to fire one. It also take up a minimal of four tons with hardly any ammo per ton. I can fire an er ppc twice before I can fire a narc. It's also super slow and easy to doge. I just go stand by an ecm assult lrm/sniper when or if I ever get hit by one. It's like an instant off switch.

NARCs, done properly, are extremely potent. Missing sucks, but a single light with a NARC and a dream can shut off three or four assaults for fairly extended periods.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 15 October 2023 - 11:13 PM, said:

As in like dropping with a bunch of uncoordinated QP vs pro comp that knows the game well -- that the match was already decided before it even started. I don't like abandonment, but quite frankly at that point, at times I would have prefered to abandon.

Yes, Match Maker.

Less frustration, loose tolerances would do a lot.

TBH, I don't see many comp players in QP (and if I have lately, they haven't been ones that make me think I'm helpless), given how wildly different the environment is you also really shouldn't, you aren't really practicing given the stark contrast between the two. However I would imagine that's what this really comes down to, the match maker and the fact they merged solo queue and group queue into one.

The6thMessenger, on 15 October 2023 - 11:13 PM, said:

And again. If you don't want part of the blame, don't defend them, don't identify with them. It's that simple.

Nowhere did I say don't blame me, I said stop treating them like they all want the same thing . Those are two VERY different statements.

The6thMessenger, on 15 October 2023 - 11:13 PM, said:

They know how it is played, yes, I agree. But how it is played is derived with the current balance, sorta like the chicken before the egg, that they have the foresight of what would be the result of things if something were swayed into one way. "how it IS played" is a matter of result of the balance setup -- as in it should come after.

Let me stop you right there, the fundamentals don't change because of the meta. While players may do better with certain meta than others, top players will stay stop players regardless of the meta. This sort of attitude seems to go back to people who think meta players use the meta as a crutch or something, but top players will more than likely be the top players regardless of the meta. Yes, some might prefer some metas over the other but again, comp isn't a monolith so they likely don't want the same thing.

[ThreeStooges]

Curccu, on 15 October 2023 - 11:52 PM, said:

Looks like you have never encountered good narc light pilot with rest of the LRM lance...

I have and guess what? The lrm lance dies quickly. You just focus down their spoter with your fast movers and have your big guns and lasers close the distance. IS lrms do no damage and clan lrm just scratch paint. Even more fun is when you find the lrm boats that are only lrm with not even a single laser or tag. I take my time breaking them laughing as they scuttle around trying to run or the smart ones just give up and get shot down faster.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 07:19 AM, said:

TBH, I don't see many comp players in QP (and if I have lately, they haven't been ones that make me think I'm helpless), given how wildly different the environment is you also really shouldn't, you aren't really practicing given the stark contrast between the two. However I would imagine that's what this really comes down to, the match maker and the fact they merged solo queue and group queue into one.

Yes, MM, but like I said, loose tolerance would help a lot.

PGI said that they won't fumble with the MM anymore. Only option is what can still be fumbled upon, and that is balance.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 07:19 AM, said:

Nowhere did I say don't blame me, I said stop treating them like they all want the same thing . Those are two VERY different statements.

You ever heard some statement said by someone before, and it kind of hit you even if it's not intended to you? It's kind of like that, you being defensive about it means I'm just hitting you when you're not the target.

Like I said, don't identify with them if you don't want the blame. That simple.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 07:19 AM, said:

Let me stop you right there, the fundamentals don't change because of the meta.

Yes. Meta is such because of fundamentals -- not the other way around, as in the natural recourse of the game where armor is a resource and with no respawns, objectives are worthless, it's a game about killing mechs fast and thus people gravitate towards what kills them faster, while adopting tactics that will prolong their life -- as in being stingy of armor as possible.

The problem there is how effective things can be, and thus that is the balance.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 07:19 AM, said:

This sort of attitude seems to go back to people who think meta players use the meta as a crutch or something, but top players will more than likely be the top players regardless of the meta.

If top players will be top players regardless of balance, why do they even care? If meta is irrelevant to the top players, why have it? Why enforce it?

Let me guess, is it because of fun? Why is their fun more important to my or other casuals' idea of fun?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 07:19 AM, said:

Yes, some might prefer some metas over the other but again, comp isn't a monolith so they likely don't want the same thing.

And I don't really care about comp being monolith or not. The reality is that, they are given more credence and consideration, despite the ones who doesn't really need it. Like you said, they will be top people regardless of meta.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 16 October 2023 - 04:41 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Look, at the end of the day, there is no real meta in QP because you can take some goofy stuff and as long as you are a good pilot you will have some good matches. Some mechs will be more consistent about scoring good sure, and those mechs typically are part of the meta but not always (not all damage is equal though, so even that kind of metric is a bit limited).

People who think comp players only play ERLL/Gauss I don't even think know who is comp or what even is the meta in comp (I see more PPCs + SL/mL builds in the championship than I do anything else, maybe one ERLL mech at most) so don't you think if all they cared about was that, that's what the main mode they play in would reflect? And even then, be glad if you do run into good 4 mans that they aren't fast brawl or rush because regardless of the meta, quick brawl with coordination is often better than any uncoordinated mess of PUGs and will make shorter work of you than mid or long range. That USED to be the worry when there were more good players playing the game. Why does the meta matter in comp play though? Variety of play at the top end? This is a team based arena shooter, regardless of what you think, the end game of this game is comp just like any other team based arena shooter.

All of that is irrelevant though because balance isn't the reason this game can't keep players, if you want to keep deluding yourself that big bad comp is the reason no one plays this game, you can, but I almost guarantee that it isn't remotely on the list. Some players might leave because they think it caters to the comp players, but that really hides the truth that what they don't like is that this game didn't play like they wanted it to. There is a divide between people who want a slower paced battletech themed PvP game, and those that want a battletech themed combat simulator and that has been the crux of MWO's identity crisis since the beginning and IMO has been one of the foundational issues of this game.



Anecdotally, I don't honestly see comp 4 mans, because again, playing soup queue does nothing but get you into bad habits, way better to play even inter-team scrims than it is to play soup queue. I also don't see ERLL spam for days that everyone complains about and honestly I don't see that many high alpha builds anymore than I used to either.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 October 2023 - 06:42 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 06:35 PM, said:

Look, at the end of the day, there is no real meta in QP because you can take some goofy stuff and as long as you are a good pilot you will have some good matches. Some mechs will be more consistent about scoring good sure, and those mechs typically are part of the meta but not always (not all damage is equal though, so even that kind of metric is a bit limited).

"no real meta", real convenient. It's always the "real" factor to dismiss the phenomena even as it happens.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 06:35 PM, said:

People who think comp players only play ERLL/Gauss I don't even think know who is comp or what even is the meta in comp (I see more PPCs + SL/mL builds in the championship than I do anything else, maybe one ERLL mech at most) so don't you think if all they cared about was that, that's what the main mode they play in would reflect?

I have said nothing about the builds comp players take. I think you're arguing with your own idea of what position you think I have bud.

But that's a bit of a positive position, here's a negative one. If you think they hated a certain play, then it wouldn't show up -- or isn't as successful. And with that consideration, I present you homing weapons and how butchered they are.

And before we go back to "it's PGI that ruined them", it's the comps that complained about them, and they simply listened to them.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 06:35 PM, said:

And even then, be glad if you do run into good 4 mans that they aren't fast brawl or rush because regardless of the meta, quick brawl with coordination is often better than any uncoordinated mess of PUGs and will make shorter work of you than mid or long range.

That's your prerogative, don't force it onto others. I guess the comp apple doesn't fall far from the tree after all.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 06:35 PM, said:

That USED to be the worry when there were more good players playing the game. Why does the meta matter in comp play though? Variety of play at the top end? This is a team based arena shooter, regardless of what you think, the end game of this game is comp just like any other team based arena shooter.

I don't care about comp play. You can argue all day about what happens in comp, that is irrelevant. The problem is how QP, in casual setting.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 06:35 PM, said:

All of that is irrelevant though because balance isn't the reason this game can't keep players, if you want to keep deluding yourself that big bad comp is the reason no one plays this game, you can, but I almost guarantee that it isn't remotely on the list.

I truthfully don't hold your opinion high enough to trust that "guarantee". Likewise I didn't said it was the reason, being the "sole" reason, but it is a big part of it. You really should be rereading our old posts, I simply said that it was a big factor -- not the biggest, but surely it has a sway.

And if you want proof of it's effects, consider PGI balance and then the shift to Cauldron Balance that did increased players and retained a bit more at it's first introduction.

Lastly the basis of blame is simply the matter of responsibility that comes with the power. Moving forward, once they did took the reigns in balance, that is the inevitability.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 06:35 PM, said:

Some players might leave because they think it caters to the comp players, but that really hides the truth that what they don't like is that this game didn't play like they wanted it to.

Which is invalid why? I heard that from Sean Lang too, somewhat, that it's just "scapegoating", but the fact is that the larger casual did not get what they want, while the comp, though with some concessions, did. PGI listens to the comp.

So my question being, why play the game, when you don't like it?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 06:35 PM, said:

There is a divide between people who want a slower paced battletech themed PvP game, and those that want a battletech themed combat simulator and that has been the crux of MWO's identity crisis since the beginning and IMO has been one of the foundational issues of this game.

Yes, and? Sure, there is that phenomenon -- but now who do you cater to?

Comps now that they have the power, surely did catered to themselves.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 October 2023 - 06:35 PM, said:

Anecdotally, I don't honestly see comp 4 mans, because again, playing soup queue does nothing but get you into bad habits, way better to play even inter-team scrims than it is to play soup queue. I also don't see ERLL spam for days that everyone complains about and honestly I don't see that many high alpha builds anymore than I used to either.

And I will get back to my previous points. Loose tolerances on the balance will help better, by being not so powerful on comp hands. While also, I said nothing to specific builds.

INB4: "Well any good build on comp hand is powerful"

And there's the crux of the problem. Everything is powerful, there is power-creep. Their consideration of , "x should be powerful, we want diversity so everything must become powerful" -- or at least an exaggerated bastardization of that position, but it seems to reflect what we see, the lack of discipline. Min-max after all, they are so focused in building around the extremes, and not the middle.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 16 October 2023 - 08:01 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

There is only so many bandaids you can stack on a flawed game (especially one with no engineering support), and yes, it is a deeply flawed game (and it is something that has been talked about repeatedly in Outreach, these forums, and various discords). It provides glimpses of what it could be through the core gameplay but there are always plenty of reminders of everything it screwed up. The game is on life support so don't expect anything but more milking through the legends and the occasional mech pack of mechs from MW5 getting backported.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 October 2023 - 08:19 PM.

[Curccu]

ThreeStooges, on 16 October 2023 - 10:19 AM, said:

I have and guess what? The lrm lance dies quickly. You just focus down their spoter with your fast movers and have your big guns and lasers close the distance. IS lrms do no damage and clan lrm just scratch paint. Even more fun is when you find the lrm boats that are only lrm with not even a single laser or tag. I take my time breaking them laughing as they scuttle around trying to run or the smart ones just give up and get shot down faster.

Like I said you haven't encountered good narc light (competent) with LRM lance, that are not complete amateurs.
Makes sense though as you are T5.

[LordNothing]

Curccu, on 16 October 2023 - 08:51 PM, said:

Like I said you haven't encountered good narc light (competent) with LRM lance, that are not complete amateurs.
Makes sense though as you are T5.

saw a match like that in fp, not the most recent event but the previous. coordinated team using lerms. it was the most awesome thing ive seen in this game. it was just amazballs those weapons being used in that way. however, ive seen that happen exactly once, in 10 freaking years, thirty three thousand games. and its only possible in a hyper coordinated mode like fp. to use that as the baseline for balance is silly.

Edited by LordNothing, 16 October 2023 - 09:10 PM.

[LordNothing]

the check engine light, on 16 October 2023 - 09:12 PM, said:

Everything is amazing in coordinated groups.

Wait, what's QP again? Eh, nothing important. Anyway, play what's fun, and if what's fun keeps you down in lower tiers, what's the problem? The wait times in T2 already suck *** and aren't justified by the gameplay there.

qp is simply the biggest source of income for pgi, simply by the volume of the player base present. dont think all fp players if they blew all their money on drop decks and faction content could top the kind of figures the denizens of qp are generating for the company. so to balance the game by what a minor subset of the player base wants is silly. same goes for comp and thats an even smaller subset. and besides whatever way the meta turns they will employ it, but we cant shift the meta, their scores will suffer while they adapt.

yes its a game, the point of the game is to have fun. run the robbits and see what they cant do. id rather have fun playing with substandard bots than join ranks of the upper tiersmen. so i can do what exactly? play the same doezen builds over and over again in exactly the same way and pat myself on the back for another turkey shoot. do you think i care if fp goes lermpocalypes it was awesome because the game played differently for a bloody change.

again, to balance the game by fp/comp standards is silly. it doesn't make business sense. its too late for mwo to change, but let us hope its successor learns a thing or two about what not to do.

Edited by LordNothing, 16 October 2023 - 09:33 PM.

[LordNothing]

the check engine light, on 16 October 2023 - 09:40 PM, said:

This game remaining active for over a decade despite, quite honestly, being a ragdoll stitched together from the tattered flesh of dead promises past and jerkily animated with strings held by... whoever doesn't make business sense. Figure that out.

About the only way to make the game play differently is to play the game differently. Even if it utterly tanks PSR, you owe nobody a stupid ******* number, or a preorder, or metrics. If someone says "yOu'Re NoT pLaYiNg At YoUr LeVeL" implore them how the **** a T2 ******* struggling to keep that stupid ******* bar half full can run into MPG or even basic T1 players who manage a bit OVER a 1.0 WLR. Oogity boogity boo, there's more of us than there are of you.

you can tell yourself that while you wait for fp to fill up off-event. imagine how good the game could have been, fp could have been, if the game had managed to maximize its income beyond maintenance level.

Edited by LordNothing, 16 October 2023 - 09:45 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

LordNothing, on 16 October 2023 - 09:44 PM, said:

you can tell yourself that while you wait for fp to fill up off-event. imagine how good the game could have been, fp could have been, if the game had managed to maximize its income beyond maintenance level.

FP was always above PGI's means at least in the context of what the game is, I mean what people wanted was a persistent universe. The only game that I really know of that pulled it off is EVE, and that game became a troll haven and spreadsheet simulator because of course it did, persistent universes for games will either fail to live up to expectations or become exactly like EVE. They would've been much better off getting private matches up and running so that private planetary leagues could have been running to provide that just like the did with MW4 (NBT, MWL, there was another one that was stock only as well).

FP was just a constant resource sink and ended up with not really anything to show for it at the end of the day other than a way to split the queue.

[LordNothing]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 17 October 2023 - 08:37 AM, said:

FP was always above PGI's means at least in the context of what the game is, I mean what people wanted was a persistent universe. The only game that I really know of that pulled it off is EVE, and that game became a troll haven and spreadsheet simulator because of course it did, persistent universes for games will either fail to live up to expectations or become exactly like EVE. They would've been much better off getting private matches up and running so that private planetary leagues could have been running to provide that just like the did with MW4 (NBT, MWL, there was another one that was stock only as well).

FP was just a constant resource sink and ended up with not really anything to show for it at the end of the day other than a way to split the queue.

problem with open worlds is the more world you have the more dead it is and the more heavily you need to lean on npcs and bots to flesh it out. spreading a niche playerbase across a hundred lightyears of inner sphere was never going to work. we would have had to scope it down to a small number of mega maps, possibly one. hence why my 'mwo: tukkayid' concept seems like the best way to do an open world actual.

single large scale planetary battle on one megamap. and some games have impressive megamaps now. with bases, front lines, rear positions, missions for all skill levels, etc. big map requires transport faster than a mech can walk so you can limit deployment range vs tonnage, so an entrenched unit can control a portion of the map but projecting force is expensive. you could in theory run your locusts across the map in a reasonable timeframe and attack that way, but with a serious disadvantage in tonnage. strongly reliant on batchall system to get units to actually fight instead of farm weaker opponents (why farm cbills when you can get a whole extra base).

anyway its a thing for a future game. the best we can hope from mwo is a strong shift in the meta to alleviate some of the staleness. but basing balance off some of the rare unicorn things that happen in fp is still silly.

Edited by LordNothing, 17 October 2023 - 10:59 AM.