69 replies to this topic

[xRaeder]

OriginalTibs, on 28 November 2012 - 06:28 AM, said:

Because that is the game design we invested in. Not your vision of what the game could be in your fantasies, but instead what can reliably be coded and supported with existing tech within a set budget in a finite amount of time with limited personnel resources.

That is why I will be satisfied with 12 v 12 matches set within an MMO scale population of competitors, once Community Warfare is in place.

But that is pretty far down the road for a game in development that is hardly 35% feature complete.


We also get our names in the credits, though I expect it will be our account names instead of RL names.

The Community Warfare layer that they haven't even discussed in 6 months? Right. For all you know they have scrapped the entire thing.

How can you even possibly say it isn't technically feasible to do 32v32? That has been done so many times by so many games it shouldn't even be a point of contention.

See you are missing the big picture here. Matchmaking and small scale forces the developers to be reactionary to what is going on. Which has been the death knell of many games. You may have bought into it... but it was a mistake to do so for the following reasons:

1. Small scale games make the impact of PUGs vs Premades extremely high. Which is why we have seen so many complaints about PUGs and about Premades.
- What has PGI done about it? They have been reactionary and first removed the ability of 8 man premades which apparently pissed a lot of people off.
- PGI also came up with two stupid solutions. One is the above. And the second is to segregate the community between PUGs and Premades. As a rule segregating your community is never a good thing and it is extremely dangerous for such a niche game to do it, especially when the game isn't feature complete.
2. Small scale fights also make certain playstyle combinations completely overpowered.
- Ever faced a team made up of 4 streakcats? I have... numerous times... especially in the last 4 days. No matter if there is a premade or not... prepare for 8-0 scoreboards.
- This has again forced PGI to be reactionary by nerfing weapons continually. LRMs were nerfed. SRMs were nerfed. Lasers were nerfed. Streaks have been rebalanced numerous times. ACs are being buffed. What the hell were we testing during CB anyway if they are needing to make all these drastic changes even now?
- Large scale and varied terrains and objectives normalizes all of this stuff.
3. Technical side of things.
- The only reason PGI can't do these things is because of their lack of vision at the get go. There is no design, mechanical, or technological reason why this cannot be done with today's technology.

Edited by xRaeder, 28 November 2012 - 06:58 AM.

[Enigmos]

Joseph Mallan, on 28 November 2012 - 06:41 AM, said:

I am not getting an equity stake in MWO. Therefore I have not made an venture capital investment.

K?
Thx Bye

Sorry, but an equity stake is not what you were offered, or did you utterly fail to understand what you were getting for your investment?

Don't blame PGI for your misconception.

Edited by OriginalTibs, 28 November 2012 - 07:19 AM.

[Bguk]

Mathmatics, on 28 November 2012 - 06:50 AM, said:

So if you stomp some pugs, you would rather do it with 8 people?? How about instead of looking to beat up on pugs, you try to educate them....just running with your mates and beating up on the pugs only helps with your personal enjoyment and does nothing to help retain new players, in fact it is likely to chase new players away.

I know im far from the best writer but you sir need some work on reading comprehension. My whole point was saying I don't like pugstoping either way, 8v8 or 4v?. I prefer it with 8 because then we can pilot whatever we want and still have a fun game. with 4 man we all have to pilot our best incase we are facing 2 4mans also piloting their best. I hate it at 4 for more reasons that I can list. My point was I hate pugstomping on both sides. I want to be able to premade vs premade. This should have been done before open beta, also I think pugs should have a chance to join those ques to fill in the holes and get a taste of tactical combat because those pugs would actually be interested in playing with the team they got on.

Not sure who this is exactly directed at but I'll bite.

I think all of us with guilds to play with want that as well. I think most of us would agree they should have done it already. It's coming. They have a roadmap. It's taking it's time. Posting it repeatedly when we all know it's coming, is pointless at this moment in time.

[Kaijin]

Mathmatics, on 28 November 2012 - 06:43 AM, said:

had they done something clever like sell us jars of paint (owndership) I would have bought multiple bottles of all of them, and patterns and insignia.

Ah, but don't you see? They want you to buy more mechbay slots, so you can buy duplicate mechs. So you can keep all of your paint-jobs.

[Darth JarJar]

Soulscour, on 28 November 2012 - 04:59 AM, said:

I think it all comes down to mathematics. Like most other companies, they discovered that the more people that play, the more potential for them to make money. You're good with fractions right? (number of new players pugging) > (exclusive founders premade team)

I think it all comes down to mathematics. Like most other companies, they discovered that the more PAYING people that play, the more potential for them to make money. You're good with fractions, right? (number of new players that play for free and don't buy anything) < (exclusive founders premade team that has ALREADY paid in money and will pay more as the game develops)

[Enigmos]

xRaeder, on 28 November 2012 - 06:57 AM, said:

The Community Warfare layer that they haven't even discussed in 6 months? Right. For all you know they have scrapped the entire thing.

How can you even possibly say it isn't technically feasible to do 32v32? That has been done so many times by so many games it shouldn't even be a point of contention.

See you are missing the big picture here. Matchmaking and small scale forces the developers to be reactionary to what is going on. Which has been the death knell of many games. You may have bought into it... but it was a mistake to do so for the following reasons:

1. Small scale games make the impact of PUGs vs Premades extremely high. Which is why we have seen so many complaints about PUGs and about Premades.
- What has PGI done about it? They have been reactionary and first removed the ability of 8 man premades which apparently pissed a lot of people off.
- PGI also came up with two stupid solutions. One is the above. And the second is to segregate the community between PUGs and Premades. As a rule segregating your community is never a good thing and it is extremely dangerous for such a niche game to do it, especially when the game isn't feature complete.
2. Small scale fights also make certain playstyle combinations completely overpowered.
- Ever faced a team made up of 4 streakcats? I have... numerous times... especially in the last 4 days. No matter if there is a premade or not... prepare for 8-0 scoreboards.
- This has again forced PGI to be reactionary by nerfing weapons continually. LRMs were nerfed. SRMs were nerfed. Lasers were nerfed. Streaks have been rebalanced numerous times. ACs are being buffed. What the hell were we testing during CB anyway if they are needing to make all these drastic changes even now?
- Large scale and varied terrains and objectives normalizes all of this stuff.
3. Technical side of things.
- The only reason PGI can't do these things is because of their lack of vision at the get go. There is no design, mechanical, or technological reason why this cannot be done with today's technology.

IF PGI backs out of the community warfare thing I will be unhappy, sure. I was not pleased that they already said Community Warfare would not be in at launch: very dissappointed. Other hand I know full well that community warfare would be worthless unless the core game is working as needed.

You have a dream of 32 v 32 or more. That wasn't the design they sold. That is your dream only.

What is more, I don't think a team of 32 would be any better than a platoon of three four-mech lances competing with an equivalent OpFor, and I think it might be much worse. So you and I disagree on that.

Point is we are not the game designer and it isn't our futures that are on the line so let's accept that PGI and Piranha are better positioned to make sound design choices that their livelihoods depend on instead of some freaking armchair generals who have nothing on the line they couldn't spare.

If you couldn't spare what you invested you did not choose wisely.

[Matte Black]

The simple answer to the OP's question is....

Because you want it to.

I do not want it to suck, therefor it does not suck for me.

[Bguk]

miscreant, on 28 November 2012 - 06:55 AM, said:

The game would be better with:

-Server browser
-Respawns
-Larger maps

I love it regardless, but it's SO short of what could have been.

First part, that's not the game I attempted to fund heading into this.

Second part, how long has this game been around? Give it time to be fleshed out.

[Taizan]

Mathmatics, on 28 November 2012 - 06:55 AM, said:

Well we thought (I didnt) but they told us we would get it back nov 24th. That whole week my TS was filled with people raging and other people saying "just relax its only a few more days and you will never have to deal with this **** again" so we are all a bit butt sore and some of us SHOCKED <gasp> (not me) about the delay. I wouldn't be surprised if it stayed this way.

I get the part about being bitter for it not coming up on the 24th and being delayed and expectations not being fulfilled. At the moment we're just at under 4 weeks for it to be removed though and in the mean time PGI has been able to collect more sensible data on players to improve the way matchmaking works.

[Viper69]

Pug in no way equates bad people, in the same breath a premade pickup group is not always good people.

Take myself for example, i am your quintessential average person. I dont excel at anything but I do bring average to a group or pug when i do. I would rather have someone less skilled on my team than someone who looks down on other peoplefrom his mountain top.

Edited by Viper69, 28 November 2012 - 07:28 AM.

[Bguk]

Viper69, on 28 November 2012 - 07:11 AM, said:

Pug in no way equates bad people, in the same breat a pickup group is not always good people.

Take myself for example, i am your quintessential average person. I dont excel at anything but I do bring average to a group or pug when i do. I would rather have someone less skilled on my team than someone who looks down on other peoplefrom his mountain top.

Well said.

[Shazarad]

OP is totally MLG Pro, 420, smokes weed everyday. He's just saying that devs need to get ON HIS LEVEL BRO.

[DerSpecht]

Vila deVere, on 28 November 2012 - 06:30 AM, said:

I suspect you're in error. Team-based players typically are more competitive, and will be more willing to spend money to not only get the equipment and 'Mechs they need to BE comtetive earlier, but if CW doesn't stink on ice, they'll probably alos spend money in order for their corp to build the infrastructure they want.

Some solo players may spend a lot of money, but as you point out, they get distracted by the next shiney object and move on. Team players tend to stay longer because they have noit just monetary investment in the game, but an emotional one as well.

I'm actually not guessing.

[Enigmos]

miscreant, on 28 November 2012 - 06:55 AM, said:

The game would be better with:

-Server browser
-Respawns
-Larger maps

I love it regardless, but it's SO short of what could have been.

Personally I am quite glad we don't have that respawn mechanic, and when we do I'll be glad it is limited to three replacement mechs or so, which is my understanding. I don't play planetside because of that perpetual respawn mechanic.

I realize I am an ancient-of-days, but I like to take a break now and again. Us old geezers are often like that. Might want a nap, or a ***.

[DerSpecht]

Viper69, on 28 November 2012 - 07:11 AM, said:

Pug in no way equates bad people, in the same breat a pickup group is not always good people.

Take myself for example, i am your quintessential average person. I dont excel at anything but I do bring average to a group or pug when i do. I would rather have someone less skilled on my team than someone who looks down on other peoplefrom his mountain top.

For OP pugs are like what jews were to mr adolf hotler. This is mwo-racism at its best, like if RL racism wasnt enough....

Edited by DerSpecht, 28 November 2012 - 07:20 AM.

[Mathmatics]

Viper69, on 28 November 2012 - 07:11 AM, said:

Pug in no way equates bad people, in the same breat a pickup group is not always good people.

Take myself for example, i am your quintessential average person. I dont excel at anything but I do bring average to a group or pug when i do. I would rather have someone less skilled on my team than someone who looks down on other peoplefrom his mountain top.

Well said I agree. Thats what I tried to say but you write and maybe even think better than I do. sadly I cant participate in this thread for about an hour as real life calls but on a final though for discussion. I think all this balancing at this point is absurd, Give us content. Ignore the forum whiners, **** turn the forums off. Stop the damned balancing and give us more content. More maps, please god more game types. **** even street fighter isnt balanced at the end of the day. Its just got enough content no one cares. They work with what they got and have a good time.

[Viper69]

DerSpecht, on 28 November 2012 - 07:19 AM, said:

For OP pugs are like what jews were to mr adolf hotler. This is mwo-racism at its best, like if RL racism wasnt enough....

No offense I wouldn't even bring that persons (and I use that term loosely) name up in any conversation, let alone on the web.

[Joseph Mallan]

OriginalTibs, on 28 November 2012 - 06:58 AM, said:

Sorry, but an equity stake is not what you were offered, or did you utterly fail to understand what you were getting for your investment?

Don't blame PGI for your misconception.

I expected nothing for the money I paid so far. I got invited into the Closed Beta. I paid for premium time and a Mech of my choosing out of 4. That is what I paid my coin for. I have purchased a premium package and quite a bit of MC. I have been given part of what I paid for. Once I see Clan Mechs charging at me, I will activate my Founders package. Cause that IS what I paid $60 for. I have no misconception of what I bought. The extra MC I have used for exactly what I bought it for also.

K?
Good!

[Naeron66]

Vila deVere, on 28 November 2012 - 06:05 AM, said:

But the the founders premade teams are likely to spend more money. IN a F2P game, the number of players being large only helps if they actually spend money.

Lots of "Puggers" spend money, lots of them play with 1 or 2 friends, lots of them are not interested in finding full 8 man teams.

[Naeron66]

MrPenguin, on 28 November 2012 - 06:22 AM, said:

Honestly, you guys paid for founders mech, closed beta access, mc, premium time and a forum badge. Nothing more outside that. I'm not trying to flame anyone, I'm just saying it as it is.

Absolutely right.

I bought Founders because I was enjoying the game and wanted to support the development, I knew that it could be months before we got a fully stable client or before we got a new game mode. I also knew there was a risk that the game could close completely after 6 more months.

This game has the potential to be excellent, I paid some money to try and help it succeed, nothing more. And I ask nothing more from PGI than that they continue to improve the game, even if it takes a few more months to do certain things.