76 replies to this topic

[Rasgueados]

This seriously needs to happen.

[Xeen]

Sticky!!

[CocoaJin]

Keeping the dream alive....CLEAR!!!!!

[ODonovan]

Count me in, 100%...that is until our aerodyne dropship gets harassed on the way in and has to dump us a couple hours from the objective. Then, I'll be cussin' it but I'll still be lovin' it.


-Irish

[TheTank]

Persistent worlds are nice, though there are some issues.
F.i. you need depth first, which means you pretty much have to have the whole thing coded out before players can pick it up
you would also need players to be active in managing it. you could introduce ranks that distribute the work around n amount of people
Also the long-run game has to be considered. Far to often have I seen games where everything was fragmented into fractions, but nothing else happened. Fractions were to big to wage wars against each other and new fractions never split off/were created (either because new factions had no chance or people were not 'realistic' in that such factions became perfect communities without inner conflicts or separatist movements and whatnot). Not to mention becoming insanely rich.
Plus nearly NO politics involved. 'You stay on your land, I'll stay on mine' always makes for a great game focused around conflict.

I would look at how browser based games have handled and played out before thinking about it.
It is a LOT of effort and quite risky. While the devs could do it post-release in a branch and then when completed merge it in, but it would be content for possibly little ROI.

I really LIKE the idea, don't get me wrong. I'm just playing the devils advocate as I know personally how such seemingly small things can baloon out.

[Tantoh]

An EVE-like model would be amazing, and would have my money in a heartbeat. Realistically though, I don't see this happening. It would require waaay too much reworking and a lot more money. I see this game turning out as a 12v12 shooter with a territory grab system similar to that of Global Agenda, which is basically a big map with conquerable hexes, winner of match(s) gains control of the hex, and continues to attack/defend other territories.

Something that would look like this: http://www.athair.co.../e14_280610.jpg

Don't get me wrong, it can still be a tonne of fun, but after a while repetition kicks in and people lose interest. Eve Online has lasted so long because it gives players the tools to create their own game play and allow for politics to create an immersive experience that lasts.

I really hope that the BT/MW universe could be brought to life like this, especially with the twitch mechanics of a shooter, I just don't see it happening with this title. I really hope that companies start taking note of the success Eve-online has had. Only MMO that has had a growing # of subs since launch (it launched in 2003). It would be soooo cool to be strolling around in a small fast gang picking off stragglers on the outskirts of a massive battle.

my .02 cents

[Aodr Arnarson]

We can always hope. And we can let the Devs know what we are willing to drop money on.

Lets face it, this is the only Battletech game we will probably see for awhile. Having a new game at all is great, but it's an MMO and can be made better. We just need to let the Devs know what we want and how much we're willing to spend to get it.

I personally would never spend $120 to play a 12v12 shooter mech game, but a lot of people did just because this is a Battletech title. I would spend that and maybe more (not at once mind you) if the Devs at least began making the move towards an EVE-like model.

I don't mean huge, massive planets. That is impractical for just about any games. But a map for each planet and the choice for us to choose what and where we fight would be a great beginning.

[TheTank]

Well what I could see was

Tantoh, on 25 August 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

..snip..
Something that would look like this: http://www.athair.co.../e14_280610.jpg
..snip..

Well you could have something like that and give out random missions. Anyone play Starfleet Command 3? It was also split up into cells and you could do missions in each.

So you select a cell, then a mission and join a lance where there are some spaces left.

One additional thing that would be nice is that if you do not have enough people, you could fill up with AI controlled lancemates. Kinda like in GuildWars.

It would also be possible to fill up the other side with opposing players. So basically you enable a mission, a n-minute window is opened to allow players to join. Once the window is completed the mission commander (highest ranking player per side) can fill up the rest of the spaces with AI players.

If you meet the mission objectives, the cell moves 1 part into your control. Thus a cell with 3 missions, whereof 2 are completed would be 2/3 complete. Finishing off the last mission would move the area over to your control. The side with the majority of parts on their side could also have 'home field' advantage (whatever that may be).
Also this could affect income and whatnot.

[B3nnyjW]

This is my first post on the forums, because I like the large scale direction and I feel this is where MWO should go with meta game.

I think the game is great as it stands, and I'd even like to see more diversity in game type. I think small scale arena battles would be great, maybe even a system where you can wager credits and allow spectators? I think balanced map assault games are fun for competitive style tournament play, and I think a massive persistent world would truly capture the spirit of what PGI is trying to accomplish and it would provide the casual evening player a much more fulfilling experience. That being said, as has been stated, there are problems with a persistent world. Teams will be unbalanced, I don't know what performance restrictions currently exist in game, plus a neverending battle seems unrealistic as well.

I don't know much about developing games, but I think the most realistic way to make something like this happen is to create a game type where you play on a massive map, 10-15 times the size of maps I've seen in videos and whatnot. Teams can stay at 8 players on a side. Each team would load into the game and be confronted with an interface where they can vote on their commander, who then picks a dropship point anywhere on the map, and then each team member can select up to 4 mechs for use in the match. Teams then are dropped off at the target location and then proceed to capture bases.

I love the idea of capturing physical locations which serve as resource nodes and also as spawn points or mech bays if your mech is destroyed. In the event your mech is destroyed you'd have the option to spawn at a base or be paradropped in near the commander. Also the mech bays could be used to repair and rearm mechs mid fight (at the cost of team resources). Each facility could have gathering units that obtain resources, so enemy teams would hinder resource gathering by destroying the gathering units. Resources could be spent to fortify bases, or to generate offensive AI units, all at the discression of the commander. Offensive AI could be given simple orders, protect a unit, attack a target, defend a target, etc. At the end of the match, team resources could be split among team members.

Information warfare would truly be important. Scouts would need to relay enemy position and activity back to the team. Based on recon information, scouts could request reinforcements, and every 10 minutes or so teams could request a dropship pickup and drop off at a target location. Mechs interested in being transported could stand in a highlighted location, a dropship animation would come down, grab each unit, and then transport them to the new location and drop them off. The whole process wouldn't need to take more than 90 seconds.

Details aside, I like the idea of a more elaborate game style being implimented in the capture and control of territories. If anybody with PGI reads this, I'd love to hear if you like this or any other long duration game types.

[CowRocket]

ffs... if you want Eve Online, play Eve Online. Alarm clock ops, teenage losers with no jobs calling others pubbies..... next thing you will have Mittens here trying to ruin this too.


.....or is he here already???????

[Xeen]

CowRocket, on 02 September 2012 - 09:29 AM, said:

ffs... if you want Eve Online, play Eve Online. Alarm clock ops, teenage losers with no jobs calling others pubbies..... next thing you will have Mittens here trying to ruin this too.


.....or is he here already???????

He is already here... I do play Eve Online. This is nothing about alarm clock ops... no need in mechwarrior. Its about being able to do more then simple box matches... We have tons of FPS games, we dont want mechwarrior to just be that. Sure they have a plan for territory wars and etc but they seem to just be basic matches atm.

[MetalJunky]

Cocoa,Jin, it might help if through this thread you post a summarized outline of your great idea of a massive persistent world for Mechwarrior online. Make a simplified yet dynamic presentation in one single post. A lot has been posted and it just shows hardcore MWO players are all with you in making this a solid game. Congratulations, if all this will come to fruition, i will be playing this game to my grave. lol Good job guys.

[Ed Dort]

OK I was looking for this topic. It was also my dream that it would be awesome to be able to play on a living battletech world like that. I can guarantee a ongoing monthly membership for that. Also ı think game could be double sided. Some folks can just play the strategical play while the others are battle in mechs. We are talking of advanced edition of MegaMeknet in an awesome big scale. It will be great to see. Or Game could be changed according to Battletech history. Start playing Starleague Era every year change the story to another part, Succession wars end with clan invasion. Best game ever....

[Vanius]

This persistence is what I'm looking for in a MMORPG game. I hope the devs take a look at the way it was implemented in EVE or similiar, battletech has a lot more potential with such a rich history behind it.

PVP is fun but it gets boring something more like the persistence you talk about. Bump.

[ODonovan]

Vanius, on 15 September 2012 - 05:05 AM, said:

This persistence is what I'm looking for in a MMORPG game. I hope the devs take a look at the way it was implemented in EVE or similiar, battletech has a lot more potential with such a rich history behind it.

PVP is fun but it gets boring something more like the persistence you talk about. Bump.

QFT...and the bump.


-Irish

[PsychoTurtle]

This is all drunk talk...sweet...beautiful...drunk talk...

[Thomas Covenant]

This thread needs pictures.