Frontlines sucks Ultra megathread

[IDontPetLalas]

I am fully aware of these '2 types of players', so I'm afraid your explanation does not sway me whatsoever.

To me, it is simple: Premade teams are just people who want an easy run of it. Players who want an easy win without having to go through the usual challenges of working as part of the larger alliance team, without having to employ any kind of strategic approach to the game, and without having to input much effort/thought at all. Minimum effort for maximum reward, but one which usually ruins the game for everyone else playing it (including the random players on their own alliance). It's not against the rules, but does push even more players into adopting that 'don't care' attitude and, in time, will turn more and more players away from FLs.

I play multiple games daily across my alts: does endless ice-licking frustrate me? Yes. Does the PvP avoidance of many objective-blind, 'let them fight' players annoy me at times? Yes. Do I strongly dislike the 'we lost, just end it fast' approach of some of those exp players? Yes.
But working as part of this wider team of a mixed range of motivations and abilities is part of the challenge of FLs. Remember: these players exist on every alliance. Everyone is working with such players while trying to push their team to first place, entering as premade is not avoidance of this as you claim - it's just players who find they can't / can't be bothered to win using the typical means and are out to look for an easier and faster option to get a decent win rate

Basically "working as part of this wider team of a mixed range of motivations and abilities is part of the challenge of FLs. "

Disagree on why people join premades, those motivations may vary, in some cases it could be "just people who want an easy run of it" however while that could be true of some people, there are likely people who want to play with their friends, as well as people who want to play with at least a couple of people who they can rely upon - because that is enjoyable. There is a big difference between playing with even a couple of people who have spatial awareness, use their skills, etc. etc.

Also, it is allowed , it is one of the "typical" means. If, on the other hand, you're going to refer to queue-syncing that's another discussion.

[Scintilla]

Basically "working as part of this wider team of a mixed range of motivations and abilities is part of the challenge of FLs. "

Disagree on why people join premades, those motivations may vary, in some cases it could be "just people who want an easy run of it" however while that could be true of some people, there are likely people who want to play with their friends, as well as people who want to play with at least a couple of people who they can rely upon - because that is enjoyable. There is a big difference between playing with even a couple of people who have spatial awareness, use their skills, etc. etc.

Also, it is allowed , it is one of the "typical" means. If, on the other hand, you're going to refer to queue-syncing that's another discussion.

Play with friends =/= playing as coordinated premade

I might also queue with a friend or two from time to time, but when we do this, we play individually giving no extra focus or coordination with them than I would with any other random player. We don't religiously select our classes to make the classic DRK-DRG-RPR/GNB/WAR etc. combos, we won't focus our attention solely on launching coordinated LB attacks with each other and will instead play as part of the wider team, and we don't abuse a discord chat to deliver instantaneous attacks.

Playing as a random team, as much as you may try to coordinate things (utilising vokes etc.), there tends to be a few moments delay in which the DPS see the DRK begin the run in to voke and their LB cast. And these casts vary across the DPS depending on CD, cast, and how quickly they noticed the DRK. All of these delays, while only tiny, give the opponent the chance to Purify/Recuperate/Guard/run, resulting in a lower death count. In most premades, obviously this is not the case, with attacks being delivered practically instantaneously

[IDontPetLalas]

Play with friends =/= playing as coordinated premade

I might also queue with a friend or two from time to time, but when we do this, we play individually giving no extra focus or coordination with them than I would with any other random player. We don't religiously select our classes to make the classic DRK-DRG-RPR/GNB/WAR etc. combos, we won't focus our attention solely on launching coordinated LB attacks with each other and will instead play as part of the wider team, and we don't abuse a discord chat to deliver instantaneous attacks.

Playing as a random team, as much as you may try to coordinate things (utilising vokes etc.), there tends to be a few moments delay in which the DPS see the DRK begin the run in to voke and their LB cast. And these casts vary across the DPS depending on CD, cast, and how quickly they noticed the DRK. All of these delays, while only tiny, give the opponent the chance to Purify/Recuperate/Guard/run, resulting in a lower death count. In most premades, obviously this is not the case, with attacks being delivered practically instantaneously

Sure, that's one way of "playing with friends" however the way you described the way you - "play with friends", and my l "play with friends" in other games was quite different. It was a coordinated, static premade often using voice comm .

So I'm aware of various types, and the degree of effectiveness that various modes of communication can have in coordinating attacks. That is just part of the reason ly why I have stated multiple times in the past that all premades are not equal. That is why I don't have a major issue with the current way that premades are included in FL.

Also, what you neglect to mention is that as most people group with friends over time they do tend to recognize each other's habits and become more effective- which gives them an advantage. I would expect that give your premade advantage as well if you group together regularly enough.

[Mistress_Irika]

I play multiple games daily across my alts: does endless ice-licking frustrate me? Yes. Does the PvP avoidance of many objective-blind, 'let them fight' players annoy me at times? Yes. Do I strongly dislike the 'we lost, just end it fast' approach of some of those exp players? Yes.
But working as part of this wider team of a mixed range of motivations and abilities is part of the challenge of FLs. Remember: these players exist on every alliance. Everyone is working with such players while trying to push their team to first place, entering as premade is not avoidance of this as you claim - it's just players who find they can't / can't be bothered to win using the typical means and are out to look for an easier and faster option to get a decent win rate

I applaud you for having the strength to deal with this. I lost mines after 4 years of dealing with this, the final straw being medical kits existing in frontlines. Why should I be forced to only play those strategies as a soloist and be happy that I'm mainly getting 2nd as a result? Even with the current kits being more unforgiving to the side that is defending the optimal play for those that are not in a premade is hyper focusing objectives and avoiding fights as much as possible. It's hard to comprehend how that is fun in the first place. To each their own I guess. If this is suppose to be the typical way to play I don't want to be a part of it.

[Sinstrel]

....

I play multiple games daily across my alts: does endless ice-licking frustrate me? Yes. Does the PvP avoidance of many objective-blind, 'let them fight' players annoy me at times? Yes. Do I strongly dislike the 'we lost, just end it fast' approach of some of those exp players? Yes.
But working as part of this wider team of a mixed range of motivations and abilities is part of the challenge of FLs. Remember: these players exist on every alliance. Everyone is working with such players while trying to push their team to first place, entering as premade is not avoidance of this as you claim - it's just players who find they can't / can't be bothered to win using the typical means and are out to look for an easier and faster option to get a decent win rate

Well that is great that you enjoy playing this way and find it personally challenging. As others have mentioned, there are some folks who find it more enjoyable playing with friends they can rely on and this is also considered to be gameplay as intended. Wouldn't it be unfair to mandate that everyone play the way that you find personally challenging and engaging?

Let's say that you and the players who agree with you do get your way, and that Yoshi P and the devs manage to create a perfect world where grouping and que-syncing are both completely impossible. What would you suggest happen to the solo Frontline Commander who can lead the alliance full of randoms to even better precision than the pre-mades that are currently ruining your experience?

This is how Frontlines are actually run on the JPN and OCE servers by the way... there are commanders who are so experienced at Frontline that they often do put NA pre-mades to shame with ragtag random players. I'd highly encourage you to Data Center travel and see this for yourself. If I had to guess, these forums would still be full of "Frontline Sucks Megathread" because people feel that marking, chat macro burst countdown timers, and sound effects are too unfair, and how these "commanders" are abusing the in-game features to stomp Frontline matches solo.

In my opinion, the rewards for Frontline Roulette need to be nerfed, and the size of the alliances should be brought down to 48 to accommodate the exodus of players who only queued up for a free reward. That way the concentration of players in your matches who are here to actually play the game mode becomes a bit higher. This would overall improve the quality of matches as now you'd have more capable teammates and "pre-mades" or solo commanders wouldn't be so devastating.

[Scintilla]

snip

Read my post above: play with friends is not equal to playing a coordinated premade. It's the approach you take to the play which makes the difference.
Meanwhile a premade approach also forces people to play in a particular way (spend the entire game 2v1 the premade) because they want to do what they find enjoyable.
My choice only affects those who want to play as premade. The premade choice affects most (if not all) of the random players who join.

In the case of FL commanders able to coordinate randoms, I have no issue whatsoever. They're clearly good, strategic players who seem able to motivate their team and work to their abilities. They play a strong game, but not in a way which garners any sort of advantage from the outset: they learnt to command, for them to be listened to so well they must have a positive reputation amongst some or simply do well at getting player support. I have no issues at all with losing to a great team. My issue comes with premades completely shutting down the need for wider teamwork and forcing everyone into "premade yourself" and do so repeatedly (often accompanied with arrogance, but I know that claim cannot possibly be applied to all premades).

I don't play NA so I can't particularly comment on them. I do know of a few commanders having come across to EU servers recently and offering to lead (though where they came from I can't remember) and did struggle vs an average premade team. Though, of course, this may simply have been an unlucky game for them. It was in their apology that they mentioned being new to the DC and still getting used to differences. Sadly, I haven't yet had the opportunity to try the DC travel (thanks to work! ), but I would hope to soon.
If it's purely marking / burst countdowns / sounds, we get those here, albeit countdowns being not majorly common. So given your recommendation, I expect style of play there to be different in other ways. We shall see when I get the chance to go!

[Mawlzy]

If it's purely marking / burst countdowns / sounds, we get those here, albeit countdowns being not majorly common. So given your recommendation, I expect style of play there to be different in other ways. We shall see when I get the chance to go!

I look forward to your day-tripping to NA and your impressions of the game style. I break matches into four groups:

1. DRK+ premade commander takes aggressive control, uses a marker and frequent call-outs that typically include direction (objectives, when to retreat), LB countdowns. Basically follows the advice in Olivia's guide. Not sure if this is because such commanders are Olivia's alts/proteges or imitation. Produces a high win-rate, while requiring little of the 20 randos. Mostly tedious.

2. Commander takes light control, with fewer call-outs. Tends to note the strategic situation rather than dragging the team around by its collective noses. If playing DRK, usually announces the dive, sometimes via countdown. Commander is either solo or apparently leading a less-coordinated (non-voice?) premade. Mostly enjoyable.

3. No single commander, but with a handful of people contributing to call-outs. May or may not include dive countdowns depending on comp. Enjoyable, occasionally great.

4. No commander, very few call-outs from anyone. Naturally generates the greatest variation of results, and is the most dependent on whether there is a premade and/or aggressive commander on an opposing team. Some of the best matches can come from this scenario, but they are honestly rare since it requires the majority of the players to be above-average. Against a strong premade can also rapidly deteriorate into a massacre. From awful to exceptional.

[Valence]

I doubt very much that it's a "utopia dream", nor that it takes a "Super Ai" given that the evaluating and rewarding performance based upon various types of contribution in large scale non-organized (ie non pre-made) combat has been around for at least 15 years that I'm aware of, at least more- so it pre-dates AI.

Which is not to say that those systems are perfect, and that whomever designs them doesn't factor in some types of contribution, or work-arounds that benefit specific roles- however it should be possible.

I'm not saying how it would be done - I would be surprised if it didn't factor roles into account - so no -why would kills matter equally across all jobs, I would also be surprised in modes with objectives, that points towards breaking ice- for example- wouldn't count. I've seen similar contribution used in other games.

However I'm not the game designer. I have no idea of how they would weight what type of contribution and how they would calculate in the game. Not my problem.

This kinda reminds me my producer when I worked in video games. "I have no idea how you're gonna do it, just do it, even though I got explained why it's pure fantasy. Not my problem."

[IDontPetLalas]

This kinda reminds me my producer when I worked in video games. "I have no idea how you're gonna do it, just do it, even though I got explained why it's pure fantasy. Not my problem."

This kind of reminds me of some junior developers that I've worked with starting in their first jobs that insists something can't be done until we actually tell them someone on the team worked it / a colleague we know worked on it / we arrange a demo for them personally.

So in this case, as someone who has experienced a similar feature- I don't see why it would be "pure fantasy" to expect that I can request that it be evaluated. As the consumer it is not my role to design the solution , nor to evaluate the effort.

That is the game designer's role - and, since you don't know me at all - what I would expect is that if the request isn't feasible - then the game designer has someone at Square who can propose viable alternative(s) - since there isn't any discussion with the community prior to changes being implemented.

[Mawlzy]

This kind of reminds me of some junior developers that I've worked with starting in their first jobs that insists something can't be done until we actually tell them someone on the team worked it / a colleague we know worked on it / we arrange a demo for them personally.

So in this case, as someone who has experienced a similar feature- I don't see why it would be "pure fantasy" to expect that I can request that it be evaluated. As the consumer it is not my role to design the solution , nor to evaluate the effort.

That is the game designer's role - and, since you don't know me at all - what I would expect is that if the request isn't feasible - then the game designer has someone at Square who can propose viable alternative(s) - since there isn't any discussion with the community prior to changes being implemented.

Seem to recall we have offered some suggestions on these boards in the similar context of how a match-making algorithm might work. Including an auto-boot feature for those AFKing. That'd also spare my blushes when my internet fails and I imagine me standing like a lemon on the field. More sophisticated algorithms judging contribution (possibly linked to rewards) are definitely more difficult, but if anyone is going to find them it's the people who have all the raw game stats. In other words, as you say, the game designer's role.