74 replies to this topic

[Dymlos2003]

Hopefully you'll be able to to custom games like League of Legends later on. Atleast when the Clans come

[Howling Mad Murdock]

BeakieHelmet, on 14 May 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

Wait, so is there no way to play with our friends in this game, we're forced to play with random people 100 percent of the time?

That sounds like a deal breaker for... pretty much the entire mechwarrior community that's been built up over the last twenty years or so, and serious cause for alarm. I mean, if we can't play with our friends then what's the point of playing a multiplayer game in the first place? That's what multiplayer was made for.

Heck, what's the point of mercenary companies if they're not going to play together? Why bother playing a "thinking man's FPS" if there's no strategy involved, no match preplanning, no trusted teammates you can communicate clearly with and understand the actions of, instead you're just lumped in a team of 12 random dudes and hope none of them pull a Leeroy Jenkins?

That's... I mean, that can't be right. That seriously cannot be right.

I get the feeling there might be a Party mode like other online games where you join your friends in a lobby then go into a match together (spaces pending) but that's only my view, no point worrying until they tell us either way

They also state that although it not going to be available at launch its clearly something they are looking at.

Edited by Howling Mad Murdock, 15 May 2012 - 12:30 AM.

[Victor Morson]

Garth Erlam, on 14 May 2012 - 09:02 AM, said:

Lastly, there will be a team balancing mechanic in place when it comes to finding matches. We are still working out the final details on how we want this to work whether it goes with BV or based on tonnage or a combination therein.

That's really great to hear. Having a BV/Tonnage system confirmed to balance things out atop of the attempts made at balancing the 'mechs themselves is a huge plus, since my concern is less a lighter 'mech killing a heavier one, and the benefits of grouped fire from heavier 'mechs in team situations. This really completely alleviates my fears, though!

Garth Erlam, on 14 May 2012 - 09:02 AM, said:

[BRYAN]: Not at launch. Post launch, maybe. This is not a traditional multiplayer game.

This is the only thing that worries me, because I really think in order for the game to be competitive feeling, organized and higher tier units really need to be able to specifically seek each other out for fights. Even if you end up with 12 really excellent players on a random team, it's really no match for tight coordination.

I will cross my fingers and really hope that this is considered (in particular for gaming tournaments and such) for the game at a later time, and that parameters for trying to match organized teams against one another is one of the match making mechanics - which could help the level of competition a ton.

[Victor Morson]

Garth Erlam, on 14 May 2012 - 12:22 PM, said:

You think we're trying not to break the game? You've never seen a testing team at work have you?
The first thing the testers did was make that mach 1 Jenner, then came the Small Laser Armada, followed by the SRM Renaissance. We have competitions for the best K:D, the best W:L ratio. Our best player uses a Hunchback - s/he used to use a Catapult.

We do 2v1's, 10v10's, 3v4's, everything. We stack teams on purpose, we try to see if our best player can take on two, three times his/her number in opponents - with each 'Mech.

We give kudos and (not real) 'prizes' for discovering the best cheats, the best abuses.

And I dunno about your friends, but mine like ruining my stuff more than telling me how pretty it is

I do have to jump in on Outlaw's defense here. I don't think that's what he meant. I realize you guys have full time testers (and have done dev testing on some AAA games before) and I positively realize you guys are trying to break it and find the most powered stuff possible.

The concern he was really trying to express (which I think both Outlaw and I both agree will be helped vastly by a BV/Tonnage check) is that of team work, in particular experienced MechWarrior teams. Because it sounds like there is a ton of testing to see what is viable in duals and small scale controlled fights, but really, those are great for fun little duals and absolutely not a gauge of how battles in past games have played out.

To summarize what he's trying to say, we routinely would take in MW4 would take on a Daishi with a Wolfhound and win; a lot of the time this was our test of new pilots, in fact. Our co-founder's record was untouched at winning these fights, and mine was close. That's 35 vs 100 tons; I positively believe that any 'mech can easily beat any 'mech in a one on one fight in MWO, but the same has been true in the past. The problem starts when you, say, take 4 Daishi vs 4 Wolfhounds: suddenly you'd have a situation where not one Daishi would die. 8 vs 8 and they wouldn't even get damaged seriously.

My point is that focus fire is probably the biggest, most important thing in all of MechWarrior, and lights/mediums rely on speed and being able to out maneuver heavier 'mechs to fall into their blind spots. They won't have that chance if there are no real blind spots (due to units being clustered up), and they pack the firepower that, combined, can decimate the lighter 'mech almost instantly before it can get close enough to expose weaknesses.

Really that's what I also believe will impact the friends & family beta more than lone pilots doing exceptional things, and also will skew the tonnage system dramatically. Honestly I think it would be a huge, huge benefit if you could do something similar to what Valve has done with it's recent games and invite competitive teams and players into an NDA-backed pre-closed beta, in order to see how organized groups with lots of past experience perform. Really any of the notable units from NBT that can be found in these forums would be a great help.

Again, I think the BV/Tonnage match making thing will help tons to preventing unfair fights; I'm more explaining what I think Outlaw was meaning to say, and that I also really believe it would be really helpful to get any of the more experienced preexisting teams on the MWO forums into some matches shortly before the actual semi-public beta starts (so they can be matched exclusively against each other, without resource restrictions) to see how they react. I think it's very likely that even if you have individual pilots that exceed what these teams bring to the table in testing, you'll see a huge shift in tactics that might radically impact game balance overall. It's definitely worth considering.

Garth Erlam, on 14 May 2012 - 12:22 PM, said:

You think we're trying not to break the game? You've never seen a testing team at work have you?

As someone who has seen many top-tier, dev-housed test teams at work including on some really major MP games there is some truth to what he says; mostly for the reasons explained.

Professional testers often have a few weaknesses, depending on how the crew is setup. I'll skip the common issues with bug testing over play balancing, because that's the major issue here; and the biggest problem is that testers often will not often step up and take command over a situation, because in a professional environment it is taboo'ed and often outright discouraged by test leads. Often by the time testing is late enough when real ad-hoc play balancing can be done (as the majority is bug hunting prior), it's too late to seriously correct major balance problems that would go on to be exploited by the community afterwords.

The problem with friends & family betas is often similar (not wanting to boss friends or family of other co-workers around), with the added bonus that they may not be familiar or experienced in the genre/game series at work. These kinds of testers (as well as Kleenex testers, who are very useful for different reasons) can be extremely valuable for different kinds of feedback and finding all kinds of game balance issues, but again, often miss the mark with team situations.

That's why the trend of bringing in pro players and teams at various companies has started, and in the past, giving alphas of games to clans of professional map monkeys also was undertaken outside of regular testing. All kinds of things can be found when you have a group mentality locking in on "play to win at all costs" versus individuals or leads/devs can often see through virtue of being "in the box."

Anyway, this is pretty wordy and it's possible a lot of this stuff has already been addressed. I suspect that PGI is doing it's testing internally exclusively, which is very much preferable to involving outside tester groups due to the highly incestuous way that the industry promotes the people in charge of these projects (a rant so long it could literally fill a book). I do hope they are considering the idea of using veteran teams to help do final play balancing before going live however, as I'm convinced the results could be really surprising to everyone involved through the fault of no one.

Edited by Victor Morson, 15 May 2012 - 04:10 AM.

[Reggimus]

Victor Morson, on 15 May 2012 - 03:48 AM, said:

I do have to jump in on Outlaw's defense here. I don't think that's what he meant. I realize you guys have full time testers (and have done dev testing on some AAA games before) and I positively realize you guys are trying to break it and find the most powered stuff possible.... etc etc etc

Well said.

As another thought I'd like to mention I was breifly involved with a Guild in a prior MMO title which was hevily involved with testing before new patches/content was updated/added. In the beggining I thought they were in it to help improve the quality of the game for everyone, but it turns out it was mostly to find bugs and keep them under wraps untill the content was pushed live so they could exploit it to their benefit.

There is no easy way to test, and as I've alreaday waited 10 years for this game, I'll just keep waiting. It'll be done when it's done.

Edited by Reggimus, 15 May 2012 - 01:24 PM.

[Outlaw2]

Yeah, if you want bug-testing, don't invite pro/competitive teams, heh. However, for higher level, competitive match game testing, there definitely is a need to invite those players. Especially since the merc-corps portion of the meta-game will revolve around these top level teams. During testing, they'll be playing against each other, which will keep them honest and in check. If one team finds something thats OP and game breaking, they can't keep a secret for long (unless its a subtle bug exploit...but thats something else entirely).

For overall balance you should really focus at the top 20% of the player base. This is how blizzard approaches SC2 balancing by focusing on Diamond league. Of course if something completely cheesy is running amok in bronze league they'll address it.

Victor Morson, on 15 May 2012 - 03:48 AM, said:

Really that's what I also believe will impact the friends & family beta more than lone pilots doing exceptional things, and also will skew the tonnage system dramatically. Honestly I think it would be a huge, huge benefit if you could do something similar to what Valve has done with it's recent games and invite competitive teams and players into an NDA-backed pre-closed beta, in order to see how organized groups with lots of past experience perform. Really any of the notable units from NBT that can be found in these forums would be a great help.

That's why the trend of bringing in pro players and teams at various companies has started, and in the past, giving alphas of games to clans of professional map monkeys also was undertaken outside of regular testing. All kinds of things can be found when you have a group mentality locking in on "play to win at all costs" versus individuals or leads/devs can often see through virtue of being "in the box."

I'd also invite players from other MW4 leagues and WoT teams. All have very competitive, active teams, and these games have similar format and pacing. However, NBT is one of the few leagues with FFP/NR, planetary assault, mech combat format, and certainly the most successful. Just my personal bias, but with good reason.

Edited by =Outlaw=, 15 May 2012 - 06:46 PM.

[Dihm]

There's a reason the game goes to open beta and not straight to release guys. That will be the time to test exactly the issues your bringing up. And since open beta is in summer (and "summer" doesn't mean Fall to PGI), you don't have much longer to wait.

[Victor Morson]

When it does hit closed beta, I think it'd be awesome if they have a week where they turn on unlimited resources: Everything goes. That's the best way to see what'll happen with late-game content; I'm concerned otherwise nobody will have the resources to really give a fair shake to certain tactics otherwise before the beta is over.

[Outlaw2]

Dihm, on 16 May 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

There's a reason the game goes to open beta and not straight to release guys. That will be the time to test exactly the issues your bringing up. And since open beta is in summer (and "summer" doesn't mean Fall to PGI), you don't have much longer to wait.

I'm sure there will be an open beta, buts thats not the problem.

There needs to be something a bit more staggered. Going from closed FF beta to open beta would be a cluster. Trying to have meaningful discussions during an open beta, is like trying to have a personal conversation with the ringmaster during a circus. Open betas are for server stressing and any last minute computer compatibility issues. There needs to be gradually widening closed betas that allow more players beyond family and friends in, but still hasn't opened up the floodgate just yet. And at one stage, they need to invite the top player/teams ahead of the open beta, even if its just for a limited period.

Edited by =Outlaw=, 16 May 2012 - 09:26 PM.

[THELONGSHANKS]

Garth Erlam, on 14 May 2012 - 09:02 AM, said:

In fact, all ’Mechs are very capable of taking down any other category of ’Mech. We’ve seen the entire gamut of gameplay playout on the field and it comes down to working together and actually sticking together to be successful. I’ve seen assaults blow holes through lights… I’ve seen lights peck and chip away at assaults and core them… I’ve seen heavies engaged in closed quarter combat only to be outflanked by a fast mover punching holes in the back armor and I’ve seen slower heavies/mediums stand their ground and devastate enemies in outnumbered combat.

If that is actually true then I just experienced the most profound nerdgasm of my young life.

Paul Inouye, on 14 May 2012 - 10:57 PM, said:

Your posts were removed due to the fact that if left in tact with the wording you used would cause a circular flame war that started here in the first place.

Pink Thunder brings down the Hammer!

[guardian wolf]

Paul Inouye, on 14 May 2012 - 10:57 PM, said:

Your posts were removed due to the fact that if left in tact with the wording you used would cause a circular flame war that started here in the first place.

Thanks for putting the cap on this one Paul. Personally look at Garth's post here:

Garth Erlam, on 14 May 2012 - 12:22 PM, said:

You think we're trying not to break the game? You've never seen a testing team at work have you?
The first thing the testers did was make that mach 1 Jenner, then came the Small Laser Armada, followed by the SRM Renaissance. We have competitions for the best K:D, the best W:L ratio. Our best player uses a Hunchback - s/he used to use a Catapult.

We do 2v1's, 10v10's, 3v4's, everything. We stack teams on purpose, we try to see if our best player can take on two, three times his/her number in opponents - with each 'Mech.

We give kudos and (not real) 'prizes' for discovering the best cheats, the best abuses.

And I dunno about your friends, but mine like ruining my stuff more than telling me how pretty it is

Think this phrase, "make that mach 1 Jenner, then came the Small Laser Armada, followed by the SRM Renaissance." in a French accent.

Edited by guardian wolf, 17 May 2012 - 06:32 AM.

[flying1ace]

Hey i was just woundering if a mauruda will be iterdused before open beta?

[Sarriss]

Prosperity Park, on 14 May 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

Kaputnick - A devestating Frankenmech cobbeled together from parts of a King Crab, Catapult, NIghthawk, and Hunchback. Armed with twin AC/20s, a LRM 15, a Large Laser and an ER Large Laser, this brawler had a top speed of only 54kph but kept itself alive with 12 tons of Ferro Fibrous Armor.

The more you know, BECAUSE KNOWLEDGE IS POWER!!

[Woodstock]

The main advantage this game has over other 'similar' games (cough ... WoT) is that the damage/armour system is an ablative model.

so all weapons will damage and all weapons can head shot.

So yes an atlas does have LOTS of armour ... but the head only has 9 points like all other mechs.

[Tibs]

cant wait to play playing battletech from 80,s with freinds

[FaustianQ]

I'm especially concerned at the lack of organized matches between two teams. That needs to come soon if not right after beta to keep the competitive crowd from drifting away to other games, as once they are gone, rarely do they ever come back.

This also means that the interstellar map is simply a light show, which I am extremely disappointed in. No need for logistics, diplomacy, organization, just a pointless dot a random match is fought over (if at all) with no deeper meaning attached to it - how nihilistic. Could have been more, but it's starting to look like this will be a casual game only, and I'll have to play WoT for the level of competition and organization I desire.

Edited by FaustianQ, 19 May 2012 - 10:15 PM.

[Doogiavich]

use the forumuserkiller please.

AC5!!!!

Edited by Doogiavich, 19 May 2012 - 07:05 PM.

[100mile]

Doogiavich, on 19 May 2012 - 07:02 PM, said:

use the forumuserkiller please.

AC5!!!!

Target acquired....moving in for head shot...

[No Eyes]

I am not happy with the answer to this question. If devs can't provide a concrete answer for a very viable question, I believe it will show up as an issue very early-on in the beta.

[Felicitatem Parco]

At least it'll be a problem duing Beta instead of creeping in after official launch.
It's true: nobody has given a solid reason to take a slow medium into battle over an Assult EXCEPT for price and BV/tonnage restrictions. Medium Mechs make up the backbone of IS armies because they carry more firepower-per-dollar than Assaults. A standard 50ton Hunchback 4-G costs $3.46 million, a 100ton Atlas 7-D costs $9.6 million. Assaults are very, very expensive.

One thing that gets floated around is turn-rate [and torso-twist-rates] which should benifit a Medium over an Assault Mech, but the degree of difference will only be known to us upon Beta launch.

Edited by Prosperity Park, 20 May 2012 - 11:33 PM.