|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
SirManBoy
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
795
   |
Posted - 2015.01.13 18:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:The CPM is very vocally split on this topic. I think it is one of the simplest way to alleviate pubstomping but I do understand that 4 is limiting when you have an active corp and want to play with your friends. I am looking at whether we can have 4 man squads for public and keep 6 or even 8 for FW.
No one wants a persistent outlet for team deploy more than me. NO ONE! But...
If groups of +4 only have PC and FW to play in, then we have essentially confined larger groups to skirmish type matches, exclusively. BLEH!!!
This produces a horrible dilemma for some players--you can either party with a large group of your buddies but play only one match type all of the time, or you can play your favorite non-skirm match type (dom in my case) but do so with just three other mercs. In my opinion, it's a less than ideal solution.
Larger groups deserve access to match variety too, but banishing us to FW takes all of that away.
Other things that worry me...
1. War barge strikes become even less frequent with 4-man squads.
2. You can't earn ISK in FW.
3. FW compensation doesn't account for individual match performance.
4. FW stores don't have all of the gear that you need, especially if you are a loyalist.
5. How perfect does the matchmaking have to be before I can deploy into a match? Will my 8-man squad or 16-man platoon be forced to wait around in queue for an equally powerful opponent?
And back to domination...
What a perfectly-suited match type for two cohesive teams to meet and rip each other apart. Limiting it to 4-man squads is such a waste. 
|
SirManBoy
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
795
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 18:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
LAVALLOIS Nash wrote:SirManBoy wrote:
If groups of +4 only have PC and FW to play in, then we have essentially confined larger groups to skirmish type matches, exclusively. BLEH!!!
This produces a horrible dilemma for some players--you can either party with a large group of your buddies but play only one match type all of the time, or you can play your favorite non-skirm match type (dom in my case) but do so with just three other mercs. In my opinion, it's a less than ideal solution
I dont get your logic. So lets nevermind the new players who dont have core skills or protofits or map knowledge. Lets continue to put them against 6 man stomp squads from your corp because "These are friends partying". So if you arent stomping new players, you arent able to have fun? CCP wants to increase salvage payout...based on one of your ideas. Theres a thread in this section. You think that you could focus on the issue? If the problem with 6 people is needing to make ISK to be friends, then why not focus on FW payouts and leave the new and casual players alone in the one mode they have? Why not push for Dom and Ambush to be added to FW? Why not try to make things better, instead of maintaining a status quo thats hobbled the game? Frankly I find your view on squads beyond selfish. There are many ways people can "hang out" in this game. There are chat channels and voice chats and such. I dont understand the whole mentality of "The only way i can hang out with my dear, lifelong friends is by stomping new players in pubs". The ideas in this thread would let pubs become more relaxed, raise the stakes on FW, and allow a better team deploy in PC, and you're hung up on the fact that people with no competitive drive want to "party" by stomping new players out of the academy.
Well, that was an exceptionally aggro response. LOL
|
SirManBoy
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
795
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 19:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
voidfaction wrote:LAVALLOIS Nash wrote:SirManBoy wrote:
If groups of +4 only have PC and FW to play in, then we have essentially confined larger groups to skirmish type matches, exclusively. BLEH!!!
This produces a horrible dilemma for some players--you can either party with a large group of your buddies but play only one match type all of the time, or you can play your favorite non-skirm match type (dom in my case) but do so with just three other mercs. In my opinion, it's a less than ideal solution
I dont get your logic. So lets nevermind the new players who dont have core skills or protofits or map knowledge. Lets continue to put them against 6 man stomp squads from your corp because "These are friends partying". So if you arent stomping new players, you arent able to have fun? CCP wants to increase salvage payout...based on one of your ideas. Theres a thread in this section. You think that you could focus on the issue? If the problem with 6 people is needing to make ISK to be friends, then why not focus on FW payouts and leave the new and casual players alone in the one mode they have? Why not push for Dom and Ambush to be added to FW? Why not try to make things better, instead of maintaining a status quo thats hobbled the game? Frankly I find your view on squads beyond selfish. There are many ways people can "hang out" in this game. There are chat channels and voice chats and such. I dont understand the whole mentality of "The only way i can hang out with my dear, lifelong friends is by stomping new players in pubs". The ideas in this thread would let pubs become more relaxed, raise the stakes on FW, and allow a better team deploy in PC, and you're hung up on the fact that people with no competitive drive want to "party" by stomping new players out of the academy. SirManBoy is a vet and does not care about new or casual players. He cares about his corp and his friends. CCP needs to think of new money and player retention and not CPMs like SirManBoy proto stomping corps
Buddy,
I care about this game as much as anyone and I recognize the problems that it faces. However, we need careful solutions that do more than just shift heartaches from one portion of the community to another. I'm certain that such a solution can be found here, but at this juncture I'm simply expressing some of the problems I see with an overly simplistic change that bars squads of a certain size from competing in pubs. I realize that it's a popular idea supported by many people in this thread, but it comes with sacrifices that deserve consideration. I don't think I'm being unfair by saying so. |
SirManBoy
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
795
|
Posted - 2015.01.14 12:03:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Thanks everyone, I have requested technical evaluation of the following features:
1)Is it possible to seed Domination modes into the FW rotation
2)Is it possible and easy to give some ISK per FW match
3)Is it possible and easy to roll on your own team gear, instead of the enemies for loot (as Gallente I need Gallente Gear) in FW
4)Is it possible to easily (permanently) align with a faction (bloodpact/loyalist) so you get more LP for that Faction, but massively reduced LP/canGÇÖt fight for the other in FW
5)We are thinking about creating Platoons, which is either 2+ 4 man squads that are joined, or simply an 8, 12 and 16 man squad that can only deploy to FW and PC
6) Is it possible to have, instead of our single squad option, which is causing balance issues where 6 man proto squads farm new players.
Create Squad (4)
Create Platoon (8)
Create Battleforce (16)
And let the matchmaker check for conditions:
If member in Platoon queues for Public Contracts get errormessage(Platoons and Battleforces cannot queue for Public Contracts!)
I think we can solve this whole issue by allowing battleforces to queue into pub matches provided that they can only launch against another battleforce. Teams could coordinate their queues accordingly in channels thus making the situation fairly efficient. This also allows large groupings of players to enjoy all of the match types afforded to everyone else without adding other match types to FW.
It might also be worth considering an option in settings that allows players to check whether or not they would be willing to act as auxiliary members of a battleforce that they are themselves not a part of. There are some solo players who would find this appealing and it would also help battleforces fill the gaps when they don't have exactly 16 players. |
SirManBoy
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
802
|
Posted - 2015.01.15 12:48:00 -
[5] - Quote
Regis Blackbird wrote:What about the following?
For FW queue:
- Standard squad (4) works as today (matched against other squads and solo players) and starts a 16 vs 16 game.
- Preference will always be given to match Battleforce against Battleforce, but if no match is made 2 Platoons is selected.
- Platoons might get matched against Battleforces (as above) or 2 other Platoons.
You guys have me close to sold on 4-man squads in pubs provided that we find a solution that allows larger groups to enjoy the same match variety as everyone else, but if we're going down the road of making pubs more friendly to solo players, new players, etc., then I see no reason to go out of the way to protect people in FW.
Where there are balance mechanics meant to protect players there is no true meta. I'm okay with protectionist matchmaking principles in pubs because they are meant to be a more casual experience, but if we ever hope to give meaning to FW then we really need the gloves to come off so that it's a harsher experience.
There should be a potential cost to being anti-social in FW and a potential benefit for those who form ties and make allies. There is no net gain in the meta of FW if the advantage of being on an organized team is always cancelled out against another perfectly matched opponent. If we ever find a way to make the faction experience similar to the corp/alliance experience, then people could more easily find each other and interact with their factional allies thereby naturally promoting organized team play over soloing. In my opinion, FW needs to be something totally unique and entirely meta-driven, but pub-style matchmaking balance jeopardizes that vision.
By the way, if you disagree with that sentiment, be kind enough to express your dissent without resorting to insults, innuendos, or other remarks that serve only to attack me for who I am or what corp I belong to. There's really no need for that kind of discourse. Thanks. |
SirManBoy
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
811
|
Posted - 2015.01.18 08:36:00 -
[6] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:As far as I know at this point the CPM is no longer split on the issue of 4 man squads in pubs provided it enables 8 and 16 man squads in FW and PC.
I feel that this is an acceptable, albeit imperfect proposition in the short-term, but the ideal long-term solution needs to include a way for 8 and 16-man units to play ambush and dom matches as well. But yes, no one is standing in the way of this, especially when it has the potential to finally give us an outlet for perpetual team deployments. |
SirManBoy
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
811
|
Posted - 2015.01.18 09:33:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tesfa Alem wrote:SirManBoy wrote:Kain Spero wrote:As far as I know at this point the CPM is no longer split on the issue of 4 man squads in pubs provided it enables 8 and 16 man squads in FW and PC. I feel that this is an acceptable, albeit imperfect proposition in the short-term, but the ideal long-term solution needs to include a way for 8 and 16-man units to play ambush and dom matches as well. But yes, no one is standing in the way of this, especially when it has the potential to finally give us an outlet for perpetual team deployments. It still doesn't make reducing squad size a horrible idea. Why should squad size be a trade off between game modes? I doubt there a magical formula that says "no unless you have only 4 players per squad in pubs then 8 or 16 cannot compute for any thing else?" Its crap CPM diplomacy, and bad representation of the Dust 514 playerbase when you want to stop god knows on how many people who have running together for years from doing so, for the sake of P (vomit) C. You really ought to traverse the various chat channels and tell people they ought to kick every 2 guys out of each squad right now, they'll have more fun if the stop running with their friends.
If you think I am thrilled by this, then you are mistaken. However, this is the way the wind is blowing. Instead of obstructing the process, I plan on brokering the most equitable outcome I can for all interested parties. |
|
|
| |
|