No Guts No Galaxy Podcast #88 (9/5/2013)

[Fox Parker]

Part 1: http://www.nogutsnogalaxy.net/forum/ind ... 922.0.html
http://soundcloud.com/nogutsnogalaxy/ngng-88-the-bryan-ekman

Part 2: http://www.nogutsnogalaxy.net/forum/ind ... 930.0.html
http://soundcloud.com/nogutsnogalaxy/ngng-88-the-bryan-ekman-1

Part 3: http://www.nogutsnogalaxy.net/forum/ind ... 936.0.html
http://soundcloud.com/nogutsnogalaxy/ngng-88-the-bryan-ekman-2

Now I know that some of you may feel inclined to complain about some of the things said here.

• Keep the thread clean and civil. No PGI bashing.
• Don't use generalizations. (ie. "All the founders are complaining about this!")
• Remember that game development is an ever-changing and dynamic beast. Just because something has been delayed *does not* mean its not coming.

[Molossian Dog]

Personal assessment:

17th September means nothing.

UI 2.0 is what everything revolves around. Beginning of November. Approximately.

Plus: PGI recognizes that the Awesome sucks as it is. Rescaling is unlikely. Maybe we can hope for hitbox adjustments.

[DemonRaziel]

... <- this is me refraining from bashing PGI and generalizing. Konsti covered some of my points.

Unless the 09/17 patch deliveres something unexpected that will blow my mind, the "release" will be nothing more than dropping the "BETA" tag.

[Molossian Dog]

Addendum:

What Bryan said about a "lobby" meaning an organisation (which of ~4 Mechs you choose) and voting (maps) area you enter after you already hit "launch" and before you enter the game makes me suspicious.

It sounds like a PITA to do this with PUGs. I bet every game one or two guys will be using the loo, refilling their coffe cups, playing around with Mech selection, trash-talking an generally making entering a game way slower. Or did I get that wrong and this lobby is only intended for group queues? If not I DO hope that not all 24 players have to click on "ready" again and that majority votes, a time restriction or other methods to avoid stalling are implemented.

[Fox Parker]

Addendum:

What Bryan said about a "lobby" meaning an organisation (which of ~4 Mechs you choose) and voting (maps) area you enter after you already hit "launch" and before you enter the game makes me suspicious.

It sounds like a PITA to do this with PUGs. I bet every game one or two guys will be using the loo, refilling their coffe cups, playing around with Mech selection, trash-talking an generally making entering a game way slower. Or did I get that wrong and this lobby is only intended for group queues? If not I DO hope that not all 24 players have to click on "ready" again and that majority votes, a time restriction or other methods to avoid stalling are implemented.

The concerns about the lobby are definitely valid. However, most games out there already have this sort of pre-match "lobby" setup where such things go on. Usually, there's a timer that forces people to start with default choices if they weren't around to do it themselves. I personally am looking forward to being able to choose builds depending on the map.

That said, I am surprised no one has mentioned the obvious here: It will encourage people to buy more of the same 'Mech variant and thus spend more MC on bays.

[Brokenstone]

Just finished part 2.
There MIGHT be a new map for the tournament. Which would be cool if it makes it.
To bad the moon map won't be light grav.

Looks like taking over a planet will take a few battles. Sounds very nice. Will be intrusting to see which way they do multi lives for the finale battle. Leaning to the dropship one instead of timed death. Just hope it doesn't go to long. Since he said it would be longer then 15 mins. A hour would be pushing it for a few people.

[Fox Parker]

Part two is up in the original post here.

[Molossian Dog]

3rdPV:

At least we get a straightforward answer. It is a business decision first and foremost. Like Bryan said, they aim for all Mech/Giant Robot fans. And they want to make these non-gamers understand what actually happens around them or they won´t keep them as customers.
The myths that it was all about seeing your legs and to grasp torso twist and that discussion if it offers no advantage at all in competitive gameplay are at best secondary concerns. Business comes first.

Don´t get me wrong. It is not the answer I like. But at least it is a honest answer and no camouflage.


Private games:

Enables us to do our own leagues. Depends on what the community makes out of it and how serious PGI is about listening to the feedback they want to gather. An ETA is not given. Wait and see, I say.


Weapon balancing:

Yeah I kinda figured that is how they do balancing. Making changes and then wait for the ambient level of noise. Rinse and repeat with the next weapon. The constant whining on the boards seems to serve a purpose after all.


Clan stuff:

Still not what I wanted to hear. Bryan keeps evasive in how it will be done. He talks about the community reliving the campaign and all that, but he hasn´t answered the question that seems most important to me.

Will regular games see one or two players with clan stuff? If yes, how is it balanced? If not are they envisioning scenarios that allow clan tech? Like the aforementioned planetary assault with attacker and defender roles.

Just making clan mechs/components the new competitive standard, which is by definition not available to noobs strikes me as the worst possible solution. And I have yet to hear any confirmation that it will not come to that. A missed opportunity.


CW:

I understand and approve of what Bryan says about the in-game/scenario mechanics. Sounds good, but I am still unsure of how this is supposed to play out on the map. You create Mech corps, arright. Attach yourself to a faction, looks like. Then you can move freely around and participate in fights for any planet within/adjacent to that faction?
Who controls that and how does the game assign players to that merc corps? Will you be able to only play against hostile corps that are on the same planet or will some PUG drops be assigned to your front sector if no hostile corps are present? There seem to be a multitude of organisation issues coming with such a system, presence being only one. Decision making of who gets to play "his" planetary assault and who has to jump in to defend is pretty convulted if you have no defined dates. There is a whole bunch of problems when it comes to balance that meta-game.
Which faction´s units get to play more games as attackers (if it is randomized) and hereby get an advantage on the map how do you avoid people getting frustrated because they always get assigned to the defender´s role and if you fill up the opposition with PUGs who will have an advantage because at his unit´s usual play time there are few to none hostile corps online. (australian mercs ftw?)

I think PGI has thought alot about the meta-game mechanics under this aspect, but for now all I hear are nebulous wish-lists and little definite answers of how it will be done.
I am hesitant to get my hopes up that we will have our dream of a player-influence or -controlled strategic meta-game simulating the shifting fortunes of the Successor States fulfilled to be honest. Frankly, if I were them I would start with smaller, planetary campaigns (where teams fight for different sectors) in an event-like frame first and work out the details.

Summa summarum, I need more info.

[Fox Parker]

Part 3 is up.

[Molossian Dog]

Meh, still no clarification on how Clantech is going to be implemented.

Bryan talks about making it less powerful in comparison to IS tech than it was done in the tabletop. (which was detrimental for a whole era of BT, so I approve) Mixed tech (IS chassis with clan components) seems to be on the table, which personally, sounds like a huge balancing headache.
He speaks about economic restrictions and "other ways". Nothing tangible. To me it looks like PGI hasn´t finalized its plans regarding the Clan toys. And if you haven´t noticed by now, I am not really looking forward to it. For me knowing that the Clans are still quite some time away from implementation is a good thing.

-------

The only other topic that sounds like it might have an impact on our gaming in part 3 are regional servers. It would definately be a tool to widen the playerbase, as people living in remote areas, as Australia which was mentioned a couple of times, might be able to really participate in a game that lives and dies with FPS, which is a good thing. Considering that I will most likely stay on the north american servers, as I play with you guys, I don´t see any changes for me personally.
The only real advantage for us, as I see it, would be if they installed a server on Hallgeir´s ship.