37 replies to this topic

[The Cheese]

AlexWildeagle, on 21 December 2012 - 06:57 AM, said:

What are you 6 or something?
And assault is assault. That is 2 teams attacking each other, which is kind of what assault means.

You're kinda uptight, you know that?

[Kavoh]

You won't see the type of match you are wanting without respawns. However they clearly want to keep it "realistic" with only 1 mech per pilot. Although I do like the destructible base thing, its just then its going to favor the hard hitting mechs over more role equipped mechs.

Edited by Kavoh, 21 December 2012 - 07:36 AM.

[Grimnir79]

The new assault-mode seems more like a domination-mode to me.

[Zxard]

xRaeder, on 21 December 2012 - 06:01 AM, said:

Short answer: No.

Short advise: Eject.
to The Cheese:
Well it is a billion MCr idea, i like it 100% and just by the way i think they need to pay you atleast part

[TVMA Doc]

Lokust Davion, on 21 December 2012 - 04:06 AM, said:

In Assault mode, the base shouldn't be a cap but instead a 'real' destructible base with hitpoints and automated turrets.

It might be interesting to allow those who are in "spectator" mode to run the turrets if a destructible was were added. If you ejected from your mech in base defense, it seems logical that you'd high tail it back to help man the turrets. While a stationary turret shouldn't be too much of an obstacle for a well piloted mech, it could give players something to do while waiting.

[PinTBC]

Grimnir79, on 21 December 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

The new assault-mode seems more like a domination-mode to me.

This new "assault" mode pretty much sucks.

The old mode had its problems, but the ability to garner cash/exp by capping someone out at least threw a semblance of tactics into the battles. Now, there is no reason to do anything other than simply try to kill the other guy. That isn't a bad game mode, but it should have been a separate mode.

[BatWing]

You know you are dreaming, right?

All of these are ideas and great dreams and most probably nothing of this will become real. OR if any of this will be implemented, it will take so long the game will be already obsolete, you realize this right ?

Seriously, look at how this project is evolving.

Since day 1 Closed BETA we had Assault mode. Then we got a few maps more. Total of available maps in so many months? 4 main plus 2 "weather" modifications. however bottom line 4 maps.

All of these maps are quite small. If you talk about putting a Serious BAse, you know how big a Map should be? We are talking about a BASE right? with turrets and accessories.

It need a freaking big Map to be interesting. If then you think about 2 BASES, you need a serious BIG map.

First DREAM.

Then, other dreams:
Destructable Base - Do they have an idea how to do this? There is nothing destructable on these maps so far..
Active defense turrets - they are struggling to adjust a freaking Collision animation, figure if they can implement Turrets handled by a basic AI to shoot enemies

Do you understand that this GAME is in BETA but is Selling goodies at Retail price?

Do you understand that this game after gave us a few Stompy Robots to go around and kill, is focusing on giving us Holo happy New Year for your cockpit, or colorful lights or bobble heads and hula girls? All of that for sale ar real Dollars exchanges?

Do you understand that the way this gaming is going is selling you a bunch of useless things for real money while what really counts to make the game solid and persistent is lost on the RoadMap (read Community Warfare implementation).

Now, i can tell you, if Devs where coming out saying "guys we need your support, economic support. We need XX Thousands dollars to give you COLLISIONS, NETCODE, 2 OR 3 GOOD NEW GAME MODES, please help us to achieve this and within 1 month of HARD WORK we will deliver"... well if they were saying that, i would freaking fund this project again.

They are just BS us day after day after day.

[Colaessus]

I hear lag shield scout mechs destroying the bases seems like a great idea.

Cause capturing it is over powered and boring.

[KuruptU4Fun]

BatWing, on 21 December 2012 - 11:01 AM, said:

You know you are dreaming, right?

All of these are ideas and great dreams and most probably nothing of this will become real. OR if any of this will be implemented, it will take so long the game will be already obsolete, you realize this right ?

Seriously, look at how this project is evolving.

Since day 1 Closed BETA we had Assault mode. Then we got a few maps more. Total of available maps in so many months? 4 main plus 2 "weather" modifications. however bottom line 4 maps.

All of these maps are quite small. If you talk about putting a Serious BAse, you know how big a Map should be? We are talking about a BASE right? with turrets and accessories.

It need a freaking big Map to be interesting. If then you think about 2 BASES, you need a serious BIG map.

First DREAM.

Then, other dreams:
Destructable Base - Do they have an idea how to do this? There is nothing destructable on these maps so far..
Active defense turrets - they are struggling to adjust a freaking Collision animation, figure if they can implement Turrets handled by a basic AI to shoot enemies

Do you understand that this GAME is in BETA but is Selling goodies at Retail price?

Do you understand that this game after gave us a few Stompy Robots to go around and kill, is focusing on giving us Holo happy New Year for your cockpit, or colorful lights or bobble heads and hula girls? All of that for sale ar real Dollars exchanges?

Do you understand that the way this gaming is going is selling you a bunch of useless things for real money while what really counts to make the game solid and persistent is lost on the RoadMap (read Community Warfare implementation).

Now, i can tell you, if Devs where coming out saying "guys we need your support, economic support. We need XX Thousands dollars to give you COLLISIONS, NETCODE, 2 OR 3 GOOD NEW GAME MODES, please help us to achieve this and within 1 month of HARD WORK we will deliver"... well if they were saying that, i would freaking fund this project again.

They are just BS us day after day after day.

And what company do you work for that isn't asking you to make them more money by selling or doing stuff that benefits the company? PGI is making a product with the determinable goal of making a profit from it.

Supply = Demand

If you feel that your money wasn't well spent when you invested in your Founders package then don't invest anymore. Let others buy what they feel they want based on what's provided. Then let them make suggestions on what else they'd buy if PGI supplies it.

[Pygar]

Many of your ideas are good, but probably would be best if they saved this for the CW stuff they have planned later on- then who is attacking and who is defending would make a lot more sense and wouldn't require multiple games with teams switching sides.

The biggest drawback is the maps we currently have don't fit the idea well... in fact the maps we currently have are too small to be really good for conquest mode, 5 bases instead of just 2 in the match highlights how small the maps are bigtime.

[KuruptU4Fun]

I agree with Pygar, though I'd like to add that reducing the amount of points wouldn't solve the problem.

[BatWing]

KuruptU4Fun, on 21 December 2012 - 11:21 AM, said:

And what company do you work for that isn't asking you to make them more money by selling or doing stuff that benefits the company? PGI is making a product with the determinable goal of making a profit from it.

Supply = Demand

If you feel that your money wasn't well spent when you invested in your Founders package then don't invest anymore. Let others buy what they feel they want based on what's provided. Then let them make suggestions on what else they'd buy if PGI supplies it.

In 2 words:
WAKE UP.

This project started in a certain way. then the Founders kicked in. i am very happy and proud i supported for what i could.
I AM A BELIEVER.

just, do not abuse of my good faith.

As i said. be straightforward and honest. Put down a real Road map. LET ME KNOW WHAT IS YOUR PROGRESS.

When you ask for money to Found something, you make the Founders active part of this process. general Rad Maps have no sense to me.

I am ready to fund the project again anytime, when they put on the table dates and specific goals.

MY COMPANY WORKS BY GOALS AND DEADLINES. All of them are feasable and planned carefully. We know where we are, where we are going and what action to take to get there and achieve our goals as planned.
I don t know "your company' with what project planning is working, and i do not care that much either.

So, i do admire honest business. I do admire and respect the need for sales to sustain the activity.

However don t come to sell me Wonderful Alloy Rims when the Car you are giving me has a flawed Engine.

[KuruptU4Fun]

Goals are one thing I agree, but timeframes are completely different. Netcode is adaptive, once made it can change something somewhere else as we've seen many times before. So PGI stating Feature A will be implemented on this date simply can't happen. That's why they started giving percentages on likelihood of implementation, so far it seems to work.

Planning is all well fine and good, but no plan ever stays perfectly intact when it hits the real world.

You've often read that not every person at PGI is part of writing netcode. f they all were we'd most likely be playing an MMO "Multi User Dungeon" with absolutely no graphics that works perfectly. Yet people will be upset because they can't see how good their Atlas DDC looks when they added the chrome plating...

Stop expecting things directly from PGI, it works better when they release something and we give constructive criticism on how it needs to be changed because it doesn't work.

My company works by goals and deadlines too. But that doesn't mean the investors are going to be happy with them either.

[Khobai]

There should be a siege gamemode where one team is the attacker and the other team is the defender.

The goal of the attackers should be to either destroy the HQ building of the base or kill all the defenders. The goal of the defenders should be to kill all the attackers. However to prevent the defenders from having a huge advantage, the attackers would need to receive a substantial tonnage advantage which would have to be worked out via matchmaking.

Edited by Khobai, 21 December 2012 - 11:50 AM.

[BatWing]

KuruptU4Fun, on 21 December 2012 - 11:45 AM, said:

Goals are one thing I agree, but timeframes are completely different. Netcode is adaptive, once made it can change something somewhere else as we've seen many times before. So PGI stating Feature A will be implemented on this date simply can't happen. That's why they started giving percentages on likelihood of implementation, so far it seems to work.

Planning is all well fine and good, but no plan ever stays perfectly intact when it hits the real world.

LOL, look.. i am not here to convince neither you or anyone else if PGI is providing good results to the community with their job, planning and priorities.

You are happy and satisfied, good for you. I guess we just agree to disagree.

I just want to add that either i should work for PGI or for you or for your company, because when my Boss come to me with a project, I get a goal and a deadline. then the magic words are "make it happen".

If I was answering with a "percentage of success" or a "probability" of success, i am not totally positive i was going to keep my job for the actual 8 years I am providing succesful results.

On the other hand, i d love to have a Boss so "openminded' when it comes to achieve goals

[KuruptU4Fun]

Bat I have the same thing you do, but I think where the difference lies is that maybe you and I are working with a physical product.

The internet is a fluid thing, once it was done over phone lines, now it's primarily over higher speed cable and radio signals. It's someone's goal to eventually have our brain direct connect to the internet. But there isn't a person in the world who has an idea on how to get that done (maybe they even have a little box built) who is going to give you a date it will be done by and working perfectly.

[The Cheese]

Whoa, whoa. We're getting off track here. I'm just suggesting what I think would be a good idea for a new and different game mode. No comments on the company or their methods required.

[Alphascrub]

Lokust Davion, on 21 December 2012 - 04:06 AM, said:

In Assault mode, the base shouldn't be a cap but instead a 'real' destructible base with hitpoints and automated turrets.

Hmmm only if it was like 12 attackers vs 8 defenders... the base would give a large advantage if its weapons were worth a ****.