Q1: What changes in the big balance patches?
A: Unfortunately, balance pass does not go live sept 22, need more time. First public test was going to be tomorrow 3 PM, but might be pushed back because of hardware problem discovered JUST today. Will try to fix it as soon as possible and do the test. Either way, trhe realized that they simply wouldn't be able to adequately incorporate player feedback between test and sept 22 patch. So, they just have to push the final release back, probably october - either oct 6, or a later october patch.
Notes that the first experience of this is probably going to be pretty strange for people because everything is different. Method analyzes everything about the mech to derive a strength to input for balancing purposes to adjust. Will have visible even in front-end, PGI ratings for a chassis' offense, defense, etc. It's all ready, but not tested by all the playerbase, and they know it's gonna need that. Going to set up dedicated forum section for feedback, down to the individual chassi/variant level. They really sound like they want to take as much feedback as possible. Possibly incorporate feedback for a second round of testing by sept 22nd or oct 6, then final release a few weeks later.
This does not include adding/removing hardpoints from mechs, or relocating hardpoints, etc. Rescaling is still on the table, but is also not included in this. However, everything else is on the table, adjustments for every single quirk type is included, plus new sensor quirks for more role warefare - example perhaps a locust is better at sensors than an assault mech.
(Literally spent 8-9 minutes talking about this!)
Follow-on Q: Are there jump jet quirks, will the meta change, etc?
A: Russ says that pretty much by definition if they have been successful in this the meta has to have changed, the entire point is to make it so that certain loadouts aren't night and day better than all others. Not necessarily that a locust is the same as a timber wolf, they have different roles, but an orion for example ought to be at least comparable to a timber wolf, which it really isn't currently. So if they've done their job, the meta definitely should change. Talks about the difference between the meta shifting to other mechs as opposed to actually leveling out - i.e. not just 'current mechs go away new mechs become meta' but hopefully a much wider range of things become viable.
Notes that the live date is going to have to be flexible, if they have to do multiple rounds of public testing it may push the balance pass back more. They do NOT want to go live with it until both they and the playerbase are both happy with it.
Q2: What is the status on phase 3 of community warfare.
A: Russ sighs, they just had a meeting on CW today. Originally wanted phase 3 to come out about now, got sidetracked (knowingly) on things like new player experience, both in prep for eventual steam as well as just general incoming new players. Added VOIP already this year, tutorial has been a huge amount of work, 4 months on it at least - theres a LOT of work for the tutorial in the background. Everything going into the tutorial was designed to be re-usable by design for future AI/pve/single player/etc, so it's very flexible. So, that stuff kinda jumped ahead of CW phase 3, along with things like mechlab improvements, improved homescreen (coming next patch), work is about to start on improved camo spec screen, etc. It's all important for player retention. So the CW phase 3 design has been finished for months, some of the work has done - he suggests 50-60% done. Backend is essentially done, 4v4 scouting mode is basically finished, etc, but the UI/interface work is only just starting. They're basically switching right now into working hard on the rest of phase 3, not going over details of what is in phase 3 as he did that in previous down halls, but mentions a few things like target system voting, merc experience refinements, the impact of the scouting missions to affect radar, artillery, etc, upgrading defenses/lure mercs to fight, leaderboards are in now, etc.
Follow-on Q: Can we try small MC rewards or other small rewards for capturing/holding planets.
A: Yes, probably inevitable eventually. Won't promise for phase 3, but perhaps. Notes that the division into 'phases' is kinda arbitrary, the whole thing really is an ongoing evolving thing. It might get called phases, but - stream dies for 30s. Next big phase is as big as any before, will be the same 1-2 month period after where it gets refined/polised. Will have leaderboard/etc to incentivize units, but thigns like small MC rewards etc might not be in the initial release of phase 3, but might come in the refinement period etc. Perhaps go into more details on phase 3 in an october townhall, they'll have more details then because a lot more will have started to come together. Might even do a town hall entirely about phase 3.
Follow-on Q: People are enjoying map remakes, will that sort of thing ever come to CW maps? (destructable trees, day-night cycle, etc)
A: I don't know. We need more level designers, send in your resume (not kidding!). They were working on alpine, terra therma, but kinda gave up on terra therma for now. Those two maps are more of a challenge. They both need big changes. Had a partial design for terra therma but didn't think it was actually helping enough so shelved it, told their level design guy 3 weeks ago to just take alpine and start over from scratch as a new level, so that's going well but not done. New alpine (if it even keeps the same name) will be same visual themes/textures/etc but way different layout. Complex in the middle, terrain like boreal forest but much bigger scale, mountain is GONE, etc. However, while that was in progress they went and redid caustic valley. So not expected, but that one is next. Russ notes that it's actually fun, not needing ground-up revamp like the others, so it was better to do that one for now. New time of day, new trees, dropships, textures, geometry tweaking out in the water area that nobody ever goes in, other minor tweaks like that. That one will be out soon, alpine probably after that.
Q3: Multiple drop decks for CW? A minute isn't long enough to rejigger decks.
A: Probably not going to do that, doesnt want people specializing for alpine, etc - phil interrupts and reminds russ it's for CW, not regular, russ goes 'oh'. Goes back and rethinks, says that you do know what map you're on, you have 60s to change out, etc. Bombadil clarifies that the question was that people don't think 60s is long enough, or if you could 'save' drop decks. Russ says that CW phase 3 does allow saving 2 drop decks, so that might help. Bombadil reminds people to be nice to devs, it's already the end of a long day for the devs.
Q: Moving on to solo/group queue changes, Phil asks if Russ has any general thoughts (not a specific person's question).
A: Russ notes that they are asking feedback on the forums, recognizes how passionate the fanbase is. Notes that feedback on the recent queue post was extremely diverse, everyone seems to want different things, zillions of suggestions. He can give an update on their current tentative plan. Notes that Neema (who is in charge of implementing these things) just got married so he's kinda busy lately.
Current goal is to keep ability to have groups of any size. Notes that during peak times, group and solo queue actually have same average weight time. Also have to consider not only wait times but how competitive the match is. Russ is staring at the matchmaker command center right now, history of last 30-ish solo/group queue games. Wait times are currently about even. In group queue, can see how many groups are on each team, actually more even than people might think - examples 3v3, 4-5, 3-3, 3-4, etc etc (I can't keep up!) - only once in a great while do you see things like 5 groups vs 2. About 75% of groups are 4 or less.
Anyway, point is that russ wants to switch to a tonnage matchmaking system. Wants to provide as much flexibility as possible, but also want to control crazy things like having 5-6 assaults on teams. System will make it so that the more different (smaller) groups you have on your team, the more tonnage you get. Currently about a third of games already have same number of groups on a side, it will continue to try to do that. After that, though, it won't try so hard to do 3/3/3/3 etc, focus more on matching the tonnage, but with giving the side with more smaller groups extra tonnage. Doesn't have final numbers/exact details/etc, they'll be tuneable on the fly anyway. So ultimately, it'll try to match PSR, try to match group number, try to match tonnage, but give extra tonnage to the more fragmented size. Solo queue is much much easier. 75% already fit 3/3/3/3 exactly, even when it releases it matches perfectly between teams. Group queue doesn't have to be that strict though if it can give tonnage handicaps to compensate. Devs have been playing with the exact numbers a lot, they aren't done yet, but are hopeful.
Russ does say though that they are probably going to have to bring back the game mode voting. They'll work on it harder to put it in the UI to communicate to players what's going on, what the odds are, what the random roll was, etc. Says that this is really going to be necessary to allow the tonnage matching to work best, without having to go to something like 1/1/1/1 or restricting group sizes. Also benefit of this is that they can make more game modes without worrying about adding yet more matchmaker buckets. Russ really likes the ability to have all sizes of groups, doesn't want to take that away. Is going to make the LFG button more obvious for new players.
Need to talk to Neema to implement, but that's the plan. Thinks people are on baord with the other changes, but wants player input on the game mode voting thing.
Q4: Asks about the previously mentioned possible asymmetric versions of assault, other game mode changes?
A: Already have a new game mode coming for CW scouting. Think they have an interesting idea for adapting that for normal 12v12 non-CW queues, would be much different from current.
Q5: Is the rebalance going to look at underperforming weapons (flamers/ac2/etc)?
A: It's not something that's specifically part of this rebalance, but they are open to that, not necessarily part of this immediate rebalance but after. Also mentions that people ask about minimum heatsink counts, locked endo/ferro/etc, they want more experience after the rebalance
Q6: LBX ammo switching anytime soon?
A: Originally wanted it, but probably not, unfortunately.
Q: What's going on with the new developments about the unseen, might we see them?
A: It's been really interesting, might want to get through a couple other things first. (Tease!)
Cockpit screens - they've finally done something about that. Text looks bad, but images work - example kill counter with little pictures of mechs. UI is focused on CW right now, though. Might have to put in some less terrible-looking placeholders for now then phase in kill counters/etc in a few months. Phase 3 is priority, but wants to get this in.
Oculus - it's working internally, probably include it in an upcoming public test - not this next one, but a later one, just as an aside to the balance changes. Ultimate goal is to support oculus/etc once they go retail, thinks mechwarrior is a really really good sort of game for VR. Hopes people are excited.
Q7: Clan heroes aside from 'invasion' variants?
A: Yes, hopefully this fall. Was waiting on the balance pass. It's going to be a timber wolf, because russ likes them.
Q8: Skill tree?
A: Right now it's not actively in progress for obvious reasons. UI are just busy, CW, homescreen, mechlab, camo, etc. But also needs design work - current skill tree is just not sufficient for MWO, they want to replace it but it needs a lot of actual work. It's doubtful that it will get worked on for at least a few months, while they're still working on all their current things. Wants to work on it, but just can't get to it soon - probably will start working on it this year, but it won't get released in 2015.
Q9: Comments on tutorial? AI, in multiplayer, a campaign?
A: Will go live on the 22nd, most of it anyway. Some parts of the academy still have enough bugs they need more work. The basic tutorial, the base academy functionality, etc will be in right away though, the rest will come in the next patch, october 6.
As for AI/etc, notes that as he said they specifically made all of the backend stuff for the tutorial so that it can be reused for single player sorts of things. Also looking to hire a gameplay engineer (maybe with AI experience), and definitely they're going to be working on AI, other core systems for single player sorts of things - they're specifically earmarking people to work on just that. 'Right now we're committed to keeping the ball rolling, is the best I can say.' It sounds like it's a way off but coming.
Q10: Time skip, to 3052, 3058, later?
A: Doesn't think the time is right yet, knows it's popular idea. Is hoping balance pass takes care of some of those concerns, wants to go through more of the clan invasion in CW before a timeskip. Wants to have that feeling that the current area is 'finished' before they move on to other aspects - a timeskip, or even perhaps allowing for multiple timelines (a 3015 map?)? Might eventually do a simple timeskip, but it'll be 6 months away or more if it comes.
Bombadil notes that they want to improve the town hall format for future.
Q11: Steam release? New player experience?
A: Well, tutorial is a big part of it. Tutorial is actually mandatory for new players, at least the first part of it. Won't default to 3pv anymore, replaced as a new player tool by the 'leg facing arrow' that you get in the tutorial. (The leg facing arrow is only in tutorial now, will be added to main game as an option in october). Cadet bonus is important, PSR was a really important thing to get in before steam to get newbies in more appropriate matches, they have a LFG button now, VOIP, etc.
Steam, some players say 'you're not ready, wait 2 years', others say 'go go go now'. Honest answer is 'we're going to steam as soon as we lose patience for waiting for new features', meaning that they have a list of features they want to get out before, but they might not wait for all of them. Tutorial, rebalance, etc. October at absolute earliest, probably later. Also wants queue changes, camo screen revamp, etc. The list of features never ends, of course. (Aside, october they're releasing a 'player context' feature where you can report people, add as friend, etc from scoreboard in match.) Russ still wants to buy more time, maybe a month, maybe 4 months, but it's 'soon', although still flexible. A lot just depends on how things go this fall, rest of the year, etc - they really want to be sure they're ready. (Russ admits that sounds really wishy-washy, and apologizes.) Could be october, december, later, just doesn't know yet. Teases about something else he's going to announce soon.
Q12: 24/7 support (i.e. helpdesk/etc) now that regional servers?
A: Definitely a possibility, can see why oceanic people would want that, admits it's probably something to revisit.
Q13: Flamers?
A: Paul created a design, but they haven't been able to get around to actually working on it. Punts to paul and again mentions perhaps looking at it after rebalance.
Q14: Stock mode button for private matches?
A: Still a possibility, thanks for the reminder as he had kinda forgotten about that. Mentions that there's several things for private match screen that need adding, including stock mode, time of day selector, etc. Stock mode is not guaranteed, he kinda has to do it because of how he originally announced it but might not be immediate. Players will have to self-police, though, for balance - example of a stock hunchback vs a stock stormcrow and how terribly imbalanced that would be.
[свернуть]
Сообщение от Reptile777
Ваши права
