Create PvE side missions.
16
How To Reduce The Grind And Create A Great New User Experience
Started by Taryys, Nov 14 2012 12:35 PM
311 replies to this topic
#302
Posted 11 December 2012 - 12:27 PM
Thanks for the feedback!! I do realize that some of this is on their list and I mention it in my OP to show support, but also to provide rationale for those who may be investigating or are thinking about the topic, and also since some of it ties into making other things I talk about work right. This is also here to start a discussion.
Great feedback, btw, you have given me some good stuff to think about.
In here I have this as a reward for finishing the tutorial, but in the thread talking specifically about the tutorial (which is linked to in the the OP) I have that as an unlockable achievement that they earn and then can activate it when they want. This should bypass or mitigate some of your concerns there.
This is simply not feasible for a server-authoritative, online-only game that isn't designed for independent client-side use. The amount of work this would entail is comparable to making the entire game a second time.
Not really true. Hit detection is done client side for display to the client, and then server side validated. They just need to disable server side validation.
... add a Battlvalue Based Match Making:
This is bad. This is very bad. Stat-based matchmaking is plenty. Adding BV matchmaking means throwing in new players who just spent some MC on a shiny new Atlas up against veterans with tricked out hunchbacks. This doesn't help new players, and frankly it isn't necessary for veterans.
This is not necessarily the case. I would think that stat based matchmaking would take a priority over BV based. BV should modify, but not be the controlling factor since this is a skill based game. In the specific case you present. If the shiny new mech the new player bought was stock then they do not have any advantage more than any other person in a stock mech. I am thinking that BV should not be as large an influence as you are making it out to be. BV should probably be taken into account after stats have. That way new players with their shiny new rides who have made some changes can be put together.
I think I will take a look at what I have written there and clarify things. Good point.
... option to Lock Torso to Legs:
Hold the left Ctrl key to keep your torso locked to your legs. Mouse will then only move your arms and change your view within your cockpit.
... option to Auto-rotate Legs to Torso:
Interesting idea, but making it automatic would be disorienting. Torsos and arms twist a lot faster than legs. I'd prefer a button you can press to center your legs to your torso reticle.
These are only in there because some people will find them useful and have asked for them. There would be no harm in including them as an option for those that want to use it. I do not use them at all. More experience players will end up ignoring these options and newer players may find it useful as they get acclimated.
... give access to MechLab:
The Mechlab is one of the primary draws of the game. I just don't think it would be worth it for new players to spend their beginning c-bills on weapons for a Trial Chassis when they could be saving them up for a new Mech. Giving them this option only hurts them in the long run.
...
Interesting thoughts. I will have to think about this one.
W
... adjust XP/CBill Rewards:
A whole slew of things here. As I've mentioned a thousand times in threads about this, switching to pure performance rewards only increases the amount of money experienced players make and decreases the amount of money new players make.
The average new player is only surviving because of their Win/Loss rewards. They're doing 0-10 damage every single match. Fighting other new players will not significantly change this dynamic.
...
You have some interesting points that I will have to ponder. The primary reason I was looking to go to performance rewards is to promote team based play and to deny AFKers/suiciders the ability to effectively do so. Receiving money just for showing up allows that to happen.
... pay to Trial a Variant:
Similar to the issues with buying weapons to put on your Trial mechs, I feel like this would allow players to waste money that could be better spent on an owned Mech. Giving that option to people who don't yet understand the game is a bad idea.
The money I was thinking they would pay would be a small amount of MC (and not CBills) to give them the option to either trial a specific mech or any mechs for a week. No CBill loss there to worry about.
This is also covered in my Tutorial thread linked to in my OP.
Check that out.
Albeit it is not looking for a full PVE game itself, just simple training things.
Great feedback, btw, you have given me some good stuff to think about.
Vlad Ward, on 11 December 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:
... give 1 week of Premium Time:
This is a bad idea. You don't want players to suddenly feel like they're making less money than they started out with. That makes them feel bad.
You want them to start out making some baseline of money and then start making more when they buy Premium time. That makes them feel good.
This is a bad idea. You don't want players to suddenly feel like they're making less money than they started out with. That makes them feel bad.
You want them to start out making some baseline of money and then start making more when they buy Premium time. That makes them feel good.
In here I have this as a reward for finishing the tutorial, but in the thread talking specifically about the tutorial (which is linked to in the the OP) I have that as an unlockable achievement that they earn and then can activate it when they want. This should bypass or mitigate some of your concerns there.
Vlad Ward, on 11 December 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:
This is simply not feasible for a server-authoritative, online-only game that isn't designed for independent client-side use. The amount of work this would entail is comparable to making the entire game a second time.
Not really true. Hit detection is done client side for display to the client, and then server side validated. They just need to disable server side validation.
Vlad Ward, on 11 December 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:
... add a Battlvalue Based Match Making:
This is bad. This is very bad. Stat-based matchmaking is plenty. Adding BV matchmaking means throwing in new players who just spent some MC on a shiny new Atlas up against veterans with tricked out hunchbacks. This doesn't help new players, and frankly it isn't necessary for veterans.
This is not necessarily the case. I would think that stat based matchmaking would take a priority over BV based. BV should modify, but not be the controlling factor since this is a skill based game. In the specific case you present. If the shiny new mech the new player bought was stock then they do not have any advantage more than any other person in a stock mech. I am thinking that BV should not be as large an influence as you are making it out to be. BV should probably be taken into account after stats have. That way new players with their shiny new rides who have made some changes can be put together.
I think I will take a look at what I have written there and clarify things. Good point.
Vlad Ward, on 11 December 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:
... option to Lock Torso to Legs:
Hold the left Ctrl key to keep your torso locked to your legs. Mouse will then only move your arms and change your view within your cockpit.
... option to Auto-rotate Legs to Torso:
Interesting idea, but making it automatic would be disorienting. Torsos and arms twist a lot faster than legs. I'd prefer a button you can press to center your legs to your torso reticle.
These are only in there because some people will find them useful and have asked for them. There would be no harm in including them as an option for those that want to use it. I do not use them at all. More experience players will end up ignoring these options and newer players may find it useful as they get acclimated.
Vlad Ward, on 11 December 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:
... give access to MechLab:
The Mechlab is one of the primary draws of the game. I just don't think it would be worth it for new players to spend their beginning c-bills on weapons for a Trial Chassis when they could be saving them up for a new Mech. Giving them this option only hurts them in the long run.
...
Interesting thoughts. I will have to think about this one.
W
Vlad Ward, on 11 December 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:
... adjust XP/CBill Rewards:
A whole slew of things here. As I've mentioned a thousand times in threads about this, switching to pure performance rewards only increases the amount of money experienced players make and decreases the amount of money new players make.
The average new player is only surviving because of their Win/Loss rewards. They're doing 0-10 damage every single match. Fighting other new players will not significantly change this dynamic.
...
You have some interesting points that I will have to ponder. The primary reason I was looking to go to performance rewards is to promote team based play and to deny AFKers/suiciders the ability to effectively do so. Receiving money just for showing up allows that to happen.
Vlad Ward, on 11 December 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:
... pay to Trial a Variant:
Similar to the issues with buying weapons to put on your Trial mechs, I feel like this would allow players to waste money that could be better spent on an owned Mech. Giving that option to people who don't yet understand the game is a bad idea.
The money I was thinking they would pay would be a small amount of MC (and not CBills) to give them the option to either trial a specific mech or any mechs for a week. No CBill loss there to worry about.
Mike Theumer, on 11 December 2012 - 11:34 AM, said:
Create PvE side missions.
This is also covered in my Tutorial thread linked to in my OP.
Check that out.
Albeit it is not looking for a full PVE game itself, just simple training things.
#304
-
-
- 267 posts
Member
- LocationBrugge, Belgium, Terra
Posted 11 December 2012 - 12:56 PM
DO:
* create training rooms à la World of Tanks.
* hurry up on giving us basic community features, such as the ability to form Units (just the forming up and chat channel part, community warfare can wait).
* implement a feature whereby a readied player in the Group tab shows his chosen mech when readied. This would allow a Lance Commander to easily check his lance composition.
* create training rooms à la World of Tanks.
* hurry up on giving us basic community features, such as the ability to form Units (just the forming up and chat channel part, community warfare can wait).
* implement a feature whereby a readied player in the Group tab shows his chosen mech when readied. This would allow a Lance Commander to easily check his lance composition.
#305
Posted 11 December 2012 - 01:00 PM
All good stuff there.
* good idea, I will go into more detail about practice arenas in another post
* really want this
* this would be a feature of the pregame lobby. the social aspects need a really big overhaul. Cannot wait for this too.
* good idea, I will go into more detail about practice arenas in another post
* really want this
* this would be a feature of the pregame lobby. the social aspects need a really big overhaul. Cannot wait for this too.
#306
-
- 7 posts
Rookie
Posted 12 December 2012 - 08:53 AM
I will admit the new users have to play with the trial mechs for far too long. I ended up feeling like I HAD to throw money at this game to play the game properly. Rather then putting money towards it to get more out of it because I actually enjoyed the game
I hope the Devs are looking at this thread
they should make a poll appear on the game-browser and ask the users which option they should look at improving first rather then doing everything at once.
Tutorials are definitely one of my first! ( I don't like playing with awful team mates )
I hope the Devs are looking at this thread
they should make a poll appear on the game-browser and ask the users which option they should look at improving first rather then doing everything at once. Tutorials are definitely one of my first! ( I don't like playing with awful team mates )
#307
-
-
- 169 posts
Member
Posted 12 December 2012 - 09:39 AM
Didn't read the thread, but here's my semi ******** idea: how about you create a user made "trial" mech pool?
Here's how it would work:
1. You submit some of your mechs to the "community mech pool"
2. Any player which does not yet own at least 1 mech is able to access this pool and play any of the mechs he wants
3. The mechs you submit become Locked. You cannot play them until you recall them from the Community Mech Pool
4. Mechs taken from this pool give players normal XP and C-Bill rewards
5. The mech cannot be played by two or more people at once. Once taken into a match, it becomes Locked for other players without mechs and they have to choose a different one, wait till that person finished playing the mech or select one of the PGI trial mechs.
6. After each match, the player using community mechs must spend some of his winnings to completely repair and rearm the mech. He cannot turn off this feature in order to avoid harming the person who submitted the mech.
7. If the player gains less C-Bills per match, than the repair+rearm cost of the mech, the mech is repaired and rearmed anyway, but he gets no C-Bills this match. Alternatively, PGI could establish some minimal C-Bill gain threshold (for example some 30k), so that the mechless player would gain some C-Bills even on a loss with complete destruction of a very expensive mech.
8. The player who submitted the mech gets some percentage from the winnings of the person who is actually using this mech (say, some 5%). However, this percentage is not subtracted from the community mech user's winnings, but granted as a bonus to the owner of the mech.
This system is not meant to replace the horrible trial mech system we have now, but coexist with it. This way, new users will be able to choose from 2 alternatives: play trials with increased C-Bill gains (because, let's face it, trials generate more income than any custom mech in most cases, since you do not have to pay for rearm+repair) or play seriously in well fitted community mechs to look at the various builds and experience various aspects of the metagame. Such system also encourages users to submit their mechs to the pool, since they get C-Bill rewards, depending on their mech user's performance (so troll builds wouldn't be very popular). It also encourages the users to submit MORE mechs to the pool, since rewards from several mechs would stack.
Here's how it would work:
1. You submit some of your mechs to the "community mech pool"
2. Any player which does not yet own at least 1 mech is able to access this pool and play any of the mechs he wants
3. The mechs you submit become Locked. You cannot play them until you recall them from the Community Mech Pool
4. Mechs taken from this pool give players normal XP and C-Bill rewards
5. The mech cannot be played by two or more people at once. Once taken into a match, it becomes Locked for other players without mechs and they have to choose a different one, wait till that person finished playing the mech or select one of the PGI trial mechs.
6. After each match, the player using community mechs must spend some of his winnings to completely repair and rearm the mech. He cannot turn off this feature in order to avoid harming the person who submitted the mech.
7. If the player gains less C-Bills per match, than the repair+rearm cost of the mech, the mech is repaired and rearmed anyway, but he gets no C-Bills this match. Alternatively, PGI could establish some minimal C-Bill gain threshold (for example some 30k), so that the mechless player would gain some C-Bills even on a loss with complete destruction of a very expensive mech.
8. The player who submitted the mech gets some percentage from the winnings of the person who is actually using this mech (say, some 5%). However, this percentage is not subtracted from the community mech user's winnings, but granted as a bonus to the owner of the mech.
This system is not meant to replace the horrible trial mech system we have now, but coexist with it. This way, new users will be able to choose from 2 alternatives: play trials with increased C-Bill gains (because, let's face it, trials generate more income than any custom mech in most cases, since you do not have to pay for rearm+repair) or play seriously in well fitted community mechs to look at the various builds and experience various aspects of the metagame. Such system also encourages users to submit their mechs to the pool, since they get C-Bill rewards, depending on their mech user's performance (so troll builds wouldn't be very popular). It also encourages the users to submit MORE mechs to the pool, since rewards from several mechs would stack.
Edited by Leimrey, 12 December 2012 - 09:42 AM.
#308
-
-
- Legendary Founder
- 10,644 posts
Member
Posted 12 December 2012 - 12:24 PM
I like that! Have others grind the game for me! 
More seriously, it's an interesting proposition. I am not sure it will work realistically, but the idea alone that you could share your builds with other so that they can actually use them would be interesting.
But I don't think you could really create a good system for this to present these builds to a player. Unless it's a random selection.
And think of the fun when you know that say, the Leimry Hunchback 4P build is one of the top liked mech builds or something like that...
More seriously, it's an interesting proposition. I am not sure it will work realistically, but the idea alone that you could share your builds with other so that they can actually use them would be interesting.
But I don't think you could really create a good system for this to present these builds to a player. Unless it's a random selection.
And think of the fun when you know that say, the Leimry Hunchback 4P build is one of the top liked mech builds or something like that...
8 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 8 guests, 0 anonymous users
