Jump to content

Ask The Devs 39 - Answers!


151 replies to this topic

#1 Bryan Ekman

    Creative Director

  • Administrators
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1046 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 31 May 2013 - 11:06 AM

Ask the Devs #39

Some players have asked - ‘’why wasn’t my question answered?’’ We receive an average of 200 questions for each ATD! We do our best to select a range of questions that will result in the the most informative ATD.

UI 2.0
StalaggtIKE: UI 2.0 is looking really great. Are there any plans to synchronize a web interface to the mechlab, to allow for out of game mech purchases, weapon grouping and customizations? Then we can waste more of our work time. Thanks.
A: Eventually we would love this to happen. There’s a lot of architecture work, engineering, and web development to make this a go. I don’t expect this to be done in 2013, as we have other aspects of the game to finish first.

CarnifexMaximus: With the ability to change mech names in UI 2.0, will the limit on the number of letters expand as well? Example. I wanted to name my Centurions: Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus and Scippio Africanus. These names are too long with the current character limit for naming mechs on purchase.
A: There are always limits. We won’t know the final limits for a little while yet. It’s a balance between reasonable space and aesthetics.

TheComet: Is there any possibility of a colorblind mode for the UI colors? I have a great deal of difficulty telling just how damaged a section of a mech is from the interface when I target them due to my color deficiency.
A: Yes, we plan to address the HUD after launch, adding some new features, and allowing custom colors.

Harmin: Could we have an indicator in the friends list if someone listed there is currently grouped or not? Perhaps even a looking-for-group indicator flag they can toggle?
A: With UI 2.0 yes.

Zwanglos: Will there eventually be the ability, in 8-mans/12-mans, to pre-assign lances before even pressing the Launch button? Will premades (esp. 8-mans/12-mans when that comes) be able to see mechs listed in the Group tab? Could the UI automatically tally the max weight of the entire group?
A: Yes! And yes! We’re going to be showing of the new group/pre-launch (lobby) screens very soon.

Jetfire: Is there anything interesting you can share about the UI 2.0 Store? Hoping for something related to the kinds of packages or deals it will offer.
A: A limitation of our current architecture prevents us from selling bundled goods. The new store will replace the weekend sales we currently run with daily, weekly, and other event sales. Players will be able to see when and how long an item will be on sale for. The new system will allow us to put items on sale for smaller time frames, down to the minute if we want. The best part – no more sales downtime! Yay!

`Mech's and Mechbay
Dragonkindred: Due to the huge support for a worthy cause, will you be making a hero mech for Sarah?
A: A mech yes!

MavRCK: Some mechs seem easily to focus fire on specific areas such as the center torso more so than other mechs, ie. Awesome, Cataphract, Highlander. In the past, mechs such as the Catapult with this issue were adjusted (possibly had their hit boxes adjusted)? Would it be possible to look at the aforementioned mechs?
A: Each mech is designed to be have strengths and weaknesses. This can take the form of lager hit boxes or geometry, along with harpoints and quirks.

Xenroth: The new mechs change their appearance whenever you change their weaponry. When can we expect this feature on the old mechs, like the Atlas, Catapult etc? Can we expect this to be done till release or might it come after the official release?
A: There is no official timeline. The art team squeezes them in when they have extra time.

An Ax Murderer: What are your processes for determining which 'Mechs get quirks and which do not? Are they only given to certain chassis' or can we expect to see quirks for every variant later on down the road?
A: They all get quirks, we’re slowly going back in time adding them to each mech.

Colddawg: Is there a limit to the number of different 'Mechs you are planning on adding into the game?
A: Not so far.
Zolaz: The "best" variant of the Awesome is the 9M and the Cataphract 1X does a better job with its slimmer profile. The Cataphract 3D sacrifices one laser slot for jump jets. The only thing the Awesome has going for it is a slightly more armor. However, that is offset by the exaggerated center torso that no one misses on the it.
A: We’re going to be tuning each chassis in the future to address some of the less useful variants.

Thorqemada: What has happened to the general Mechspeed (kph)? It can say that the speed differences between the weightclasses seem to be compressed (means there is significant less difference). This hurts the differentation between the Weightclasses and Mediums especially. Any enlightment you can give us PGI?
A: Eventually we plan to increase the speed cap, until then the ranges are going to stay the same. There is still quite a variance of 2x from light to assault.

Fishhawk: Any plans to introduce quadruped Battlemechs like the Scorpion or Goliath?
A: No plans.

FrostCollar: Do you track the relative use of Light/Medium/Heavy/Assault mechs over time? Care to share any insights? I've always been curious about what those relative usage rates are, especially given talk about how some classes of mech are harder to play than others (Spider experts, I salute you).
A: Yes we track usage.

Weapons & Loadouts

Levi Porphyrogenitus: Has PGI considered removing splash damage from missiles altogether?
A: Yes we have, but have elected to balance them differently. Currently the splash damage on all missiles is set to 5cm (effectively removing it) and will investigate if it should change any further in either direction.

RazorWarrior: Will we ever be able to use jump jets to go directly forward or side to side like in previous MechWarrior games?
A: Vectored jumpjets have been discussed.

Void Angel: Given the new interactions with the Beagle Active Probe and ECM systems, is there any chance we'll see an icon for 'Mechs equipped with BAP (and have it locked to a hardpoint, like ECM?")
A: At this time, no. But we have discussed an equipment hardpoint.

Karl Streiger: Do you consider any changes on the armor distribution? Most players aim directly for the Center - some for the side torso - but in most cases it is cheaper (less time consuming to kill the target)
Shouldn't the gain of disarming a target first be increased over the kill shot? My Ideas were (CT 28%, Legs 13%, SideToros 15% and Arms 7% of total armor)

A: Armor values are based off the TT values.

jay35: Given the prolific nature of modules (resulting in an increasing inability to carry all the relevant modules for a given role, e.g., scouting), when will you be adding additional module slot unlocks to the pilot tree? Or will you be moving some of the current modules to more relevant locations outside of the module mechanic, such as Artillery & Airstrikes to Command Console functions, perhaps Seismic Sensor as an equipment item, etc, so that each role can actually mount all of the relevant modules provided they've unlocked them and purchased them?
A: We do not plan to convert modules or consumables to equipment, as they are designed to be layered and balanced on top of the standard BattleTech rules founds in MechLab. We’re looking at separating modules and consumables, giving both their own separate space rules. And yes we are adding more modules and consumables as time goes on. It is also our intention to make players make a conscious decision as to which modules/consumables to bring to the battlefield, and not necessarily bring everything but the kitchen sink.

coolcook007: Why you guys have decided to make Arm Lock as default? The new players don’t even know that there’s an option to turn it off, there should be ansta annotation if a new player starts the game.
A: We made arm lock default because most new players have an easier time learning how to pilot their mech. With UI 2.0 and Training Grounds, players will undergo a tutorial which teaches them how to toggle this on and off.

Asmudius Heng: Russ Bullock replied to a player on Twitter who enquired why PGI didnt like the idea of hardpoint sizes. Russ replied:"@AC1DPHA5E we’re not against it, it's been discussed.”
Is it possible to get an elabolration on what that discussion was so we know if this is 1) still being discussed and why, 2) rejected for X reason.

A: No further news on this thought process. If we reject it, I’ll let you know.

Firelizard: Given the disparity between the 0.5 ton machine guns and the 6 ton AC2, will you consider adding the mech mortar line to add low tonnage ballistic armament options?
A: Eventually, as the timeline allows for it.

General Taskeen: I recall in Closed Beta that Devs would examine making C.A.S.E. useful with XL Engines (since it is used on Record Sheets), is this still being worked on? If yes, when might we expect this?
A: No plans to do so at this time.

Zaptruder: In the weapon grouping list, why are arm weapons listed as right arm first and left arm second, while torso mounted weapons seem to be listed CT, LT and then RT? Would it be possible to have the weapons listed from left to right, top to bottom? Or even better yet, have the weapon locations identifiably marked on the weapon list, so that you're in no doubt as to what weapons are located where.
A: We’ll be reviewing this with the HUD rework after launch.

Mizore: The Seismic Sensors module is very strong at the moment. Any plans on changing it the way, that at least light and medium mechs can move nearly undedected for example at a speed of 50kph or below? In my opinion this would strengthen their role as scouts or harassers.
A: Yes. We’re tuning right now, expect tweaks mid-June to bring it in line a bit. More details forthcoming.

Mokey Mot: When are brawling weapons going to see some love (pulse lasers in particular)?
Ranged warfare is in a good place at the moment; as shown by it's current popularity. But I feel it is narrowing the gameplay a little too much; there is no real advantage for brawlers to expend the effort of getting close at the moment. I don't think you can just go nurfing ranged weapons though, as balanced builds are actually quite nice to pilot now.
A: While nothing specific is coming at the moment, we’re going to be coming full circle on weapons soon, where beams will be looked at and tweaked if necessary.
Maps/Environment:
Geist Null: When is the next city map or heavy forested map due out? the high heat, low temp open area maps have gotten a lot of play recently, I’m ready for somewhere focused on maneuvering and light/medium play styles
A: We have an Island Urban map in production right now. Due out late summer/early fall.

Adridos: During an NGNG interview with your main map designer T. Jantzi, he mentioned that all maps he creates must work with our current movement abilities, but also once the restrictions on movement will be applied (like non-scalable hills). Since it's been a while and there never was an official response on the fact before or after the interview, when could we expect to see this implemented?
A: This feature is being worked on and will debut very soon (June/July).

Mrbright: When will leg inverse kinematics/foot alignment fit the terrain? I think I noticed it at one point but its gone now?
A: We removed it for performance reasons. Our engineering team is looking at it, fixing some bugs and performance related issues. Once fixed, expect to see it come back provided it does not impact performance on min-spec machines.

Prosperity Park: Are there any longer-term plans to add a Deep Water penalty to the movement speed of Mechs traveling through significantly-deep water?
A: We’re adding some new movement code that will make mechs behave more realistically when traversing rolling terrain. Once in, we can examine adding water friction if we feel it will add a benefit to gameplay.

MrLiNcH: Are there future plans for a jungle/tropical map? I thought this type of environment was right in CryEngine's wheelhouse...
A: It’s on our list of to do maps!

Spirit of the Wolf: If they needed to balance the game, and were unable to do so within the current set of rules they have set for themselves, would PGI ever 'bend' the timeline rules to make the game fit the environment better, (such as bringing in mech mortars, mines, & the like), or is the timeline, insofar as is planned right now, considered to be completely immutable?
(If it is immutable, would PGI simply make its own weapons/equipment/technology, or would it simply do the best to balance what it was given?)
A: For now we are following the timeline closely. We may loosen that restriction if necessary, but I don’t see that happening in the short term.

Gameplay/Game modes/Meta

Hammerreborn: In regards to damage transfer. Is there an engine limitation preventing "piercing" through destroyed components such as the legs and STs to determine damage to other components, or is this something that may/may not be planned in the future? For example, shooting at a centurions damaged leg from the front will not do damage, but shooting it from the side would cause piercing to go through and hit the other leg, rather than having damage appear strangely in the STs?
A: It’s doable, however it would significantly up the number of calculations needed to be done per frame on the server, thereby reducing server performance and increasing network traffic.

Belorion: I seem to take a fair amount of friendly fire during some drops. Is it possible to get friendly fire added to the end of match score board and/or changing the reticule color flash is a team mate is hit? That way people can see if they are hitting mostly the enemy, or need to work on avoiding team mates.
A: The average amount of FF damage done per player per match is less than 5 dmg. The amount of damage being done is far less than even we thought, which is encouraging. I like the FF indicator, we can look at putting up an X or something indicating do not fire along with an audio queue when dmg is done.

Any thoughts on reintroducing collison sonner and in iterative phases to ultimately have it adjusted to the level PGI want it to be?
A: No plans to rush this, we have lots of other features queued up first. Once launch is out of that way, we can reintroduce collisions to the test servers and balance them before going live.

Lentil: Could we get some improvements in automatic PUG lance assignments? For example:sorting mechs into lances by weight or making sure lance-mates appear together when spawning?
A: The latter is being worked on. Also, the new lance interfaces currently on live servers, allow the Company Commander to quickly reorder players in to different lances.

Stormwolf: Any indication if we might ever get a stock only mode? I ask this because not everybody wants to min max or build the latest abusive build all the time.
A: It’s something we can look at after launch.

Brilig: Are you considering changes to convergence to address issues with boating/alpha striking? Or is heat scale the only option that you are exploring?
A: We’re looking at different ways to improve balance. Nothing specific to talk about just yet.

Source Control: Can we have "Lock Arms to Torso" option be assigned on a per-Mech basis? Some Mechs are more appropriate than others, especially on the config and it's a bummer that this is global to all Mechs.
A: We’re looking at making this an easy in-game toggle in addition to the current toggle via config menu.

Willie Sauerland: Since capturing a little box is rewarded in Assault mode (it is an alternate win condition), why is capturing points to gain a team resources in Conquest mode (another alternate win condition) not rewarded?
A: You are reward for collecting resources, not capturing resource points. We are discussing internally whether we should add a cap reward.

Richard Strong: What is the ETA on some sort of mech option for each map?
A: Lobbies will show up after UI 2.0 is out in the wild.

Sentinel373: Is there a chance you'll add arm lock as a toggle function instead holding the button down? I mean a toggle ingame, not the options menu. Sometimes i just dont have enoegh fingers to hold that button down
A: Yes.

FupDup: Will you ever increase the C-Bill and XP rewards for non-killing/damage-dealing roles to be closer to the rewards of those aforementioned damage roles?
A: We are working on refactoring in game rewards to be more granular and role/group/faction based.

Steven Dixon: When you implement achievements will our previous matches count towards the achievements or will only the matches that occur after achievements are launched count?
A: Achievements will most likely start at 0.

Alistair Winter: Will we see a third game mode in addition to Assault mode and Conquest mode this year? I don't mean a variant with respawn, I mean something completely new.
A: With Community Warfare yes.

Cockpit, HUD & Customizations

Lukoi: Any chance you'll consider changing the missile bay door indicators to red/green vice red/yellow? There are a multitude of maps where the colors are so close to each other, it's difficult to tell the difference.
A: We’re discussing moving these lights to the HUD.

Hobo Dan: I am aware that we can change FOV in the game files, but are there any plans to add an FOV slider to the in-game options menu, similar to how Mouse Sensitivity was recently added?
A: Yes.

Arkatrex: Will it possible to get cockpit effects during getting heat / overheat? Like blurring, sweat drops or something like that? The mech pilot should be affected from that much of heat
A: It’s on our list of graphical additions.

Will9761: Is there a chance that you could add a numbering system with the Damage Display HUD so you could see the amount of hitpoints your mech's armor has in combat?
A: After launch we plan to refactor parts of the HUD. This is on a list of improvements along with color options etc.

Sentinel373: Is there any chance we will get to see the letter designation next to the players name when pressing Tab or have it there with the kill message. It often gets confusing at the end of the match who is still standing.
A: We show everyone’s Dead/Alive/Disconnected status in the player list. Can you expand on that thought?

DarkhorseBW: Why are there different types of cockpit hit boxes? For example, the Cataphract's cockpit is only its 1 front center window, but the Catapult's cockpit is all of its windows?
A: It’s getting adjusted to be similar. It’s Paul’s favorite mech, so I made sure everyone could kill him more easily.

defcon won: Can we get map coordinate added to the HUD? Whatever coordinate the main crosshairs are on should show above the distance for team coordination. And/or put a marker on the spot you're in the crosshairs, shared with your team or lance.
A: I’ll ask the team what they think.

Miscenalleous

Ninthshadow: Is there any chance we will be getting new bug/crash reporting tools in the near future?
A: The tools team is working on another feature right now, however this IS on the short list.

Dude42: Any chance of getting the malformed packet issue resolved before release?
A: Yes. The engineering team is working on this now. Similar to the HUD bug, this is an issue deep within CryEngine.

Darwins Dog: Would it be possible to have a link for us to get out stats (mechs, weapons, etc.) in something live a .csv file? I'm a science guy, and I would love to be able to see trends in my performance.
A: Yes, eventually we will have an API for players to get access to stat information.

FruitFly: Is there a possibility of introducing a in game or in launcher survey that all players take?
A: Eventually.

M0rpHeu5: Why don't you put MWO on steam?
A: We’re doing an analysis now.

Trufast: How are you planning to do matchmaking in terms of tonnage and elo when it comes to merc fights and dropship mode? Will the mercs fighting for a planet just have to bring the gorgonzola, or can they enjoy some edamer and not get brutalized by a full assault top elo team? And regarding dropship; will it be weight matching drop by drop, total tonnage of your 4 mechs, or none at all?
A: I’m going to delay answering this until we get closer to launch. We plan to use the test servers to help determine what this ultimate looks like. Stay tuned.

DEMAX51: I know that, at the moment, you address balancing issues once a month. While some people may suggest that this isn't fast enough, I can understand why you would chose this sort of time-frame.
However, once the game actually launches later this year, do you foresee balancing adjustments happening with greater regularity?

A: We actually tune the game with each patch. We do not foresee patching any more than 2x per month at this time.

White Bear 84: It is great having various offline mechlabs where you can design mechs etc. Is there any plans in the future to allow users to export their mech designs from the game for editing either on their computer or through a web browser and vice versa?
A: Probably not. The client/server nature of our game requires some pretty secure handshaking when dealing buying/selling/equipping BattleMechs. I will ask though.

James Heywood: After playing War thunder recently I noticed they had a post match replay option which you could save to your HDD. Is there a chance we will see this function added in the future? since many players like to make fan vids and recruitment videos, this would be a major help and a great way to advertise MWO through youtube etc.
A: Yes, sometime in 2014.

Maverick01: Can we expect to see a short Cinematic trailer for the launch of MWO? If yes, can the trailer be narrated by Duncan Fisher or even Morgan Freeman? This would serve to introduce the futuristic universe of the Inner Sphere, showing the war and politics of the Great Houses and ultimately leading to the Clan Invasion.
A: I would expect something cool for launch.

MustrumRidcully: Can you explain a bit about the patch release process?
I don't want to come off as overly critical or something here, but:
We've had at least two patches where missile flight paths were broken and one where missiles' splash damage interacted together with the hitbox change to make them overpowered, forcing hot fixes. Did the QA miss these issues, or did you find them too late to change anything for the build? You changed missile damage despite having flight paths and splash damage being off. I would expect the damage change would be tested, which would - unless it isn't done in game - necessitate testing the flight paths as well. How do these things fit togehter?

A: All of the above can happen and has. We have an extremely aggressive release schedule, one that sees a feature completed no more than 4 weeks ahead of going live. We’ve been working towards increasing this gap to allow for better testing and soak time. A new set of test servers will come online in the next 4 weeks. These will allow us to test major features and minor tuning adjustments at scale. Scale meaning player loads similar to our production servers. Between IGP and PGI we have finite resources and hardware. It’s almost impossible for us to replicate live conditions at scale. A lot of issues only rear their heads when we have 1,000s or 10,000s of players playing. With each month that goes by, we are able to improve our processes, and testing to improve quality and delivery of content

Forum/Website/Sales, Events and Tournaments:

Kmieciu: Was the Christmas MC sale a success? When can we expect the next MC sale?
A: I would expect an MC sale around the same time as last year, all things being equal.

Toltecher: When could we see a Developers versus the Inner Sphere weekend event (ideally including all of your dev teams and QA teams as well)? I think that would be a wonderful and exciting way to preview the Clan Invasion before handing over Clan tech to the playerbase (and don't forget to broadcast such an event live!).
A: It’s a great idea and one that’s been tossed around internally. Once we get to launch and beyond, we’ll have more time on our hands to run bigger community events. Right now the team is charging hard towards getting the last major game features in.

Smiffy: Why are the ISN news flashes no longer displayed on the home page?
A: We’re moving them to a new home on the website. They should make a return in the near future.

Hoaggie: How are feedback and suggestions from the forums weighted in the use of game development? To clarify, I see many well worded suggestions where people cite examples and sources in the forum threads, but I see many many more “X needs nerfed” or “Y needs a buff” responses that seem to drown out the ones who have sound reasons backing their ideas. Also, how do you factor in people who do not complain because they think everything is fine?
A: As you can imagine we get lots of feedback, some more qualified than others. We weigh community feedback carefully against our design goals, long term plans, and telemetry. Often what is perceived to be an issue, say Win by Capture in Assault, is not actually as big of an issue. When design goals, planning, feedback, and telemetry align to say something needs adjusting, we jump on that quickly.

#2 Othello

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 73 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 11:20 AM

thanks!

#3 Rebas Kradd

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1213 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 11:25 AM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 31 May 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

MustrumRidcully: Can you explain a bit about the patch release process?
I don't want to come off as overly critical or something here, but:
We've had at least two patches where missile flight paths were broken and one where missiles' splash damage interacted together with the hitbox change to make them overpowered, forcing hot fixes. Did the QA miss these issues, or did you find them too late to change anything for the build? You changed missile damage despite having flight paths and splash damage being off. I would expect the damage change would be tested, which would - unless it isn't done in game - necessitate testing the flight paths as well. How do these things fit togehter?
A: All of the above can happen and has. We have an extremely aggressive release schedule, one that sees a feature completed no more than 4 weeks ahead of going live. We’ve been working towards increasing this gap to allow for better testing and soak time. A new set of test servers will come online in the next 4 weeks. These will allow us to test major features and minor tuning adjustments at scale. Scale meaning player loads similar to our production servers. Between IGP and PGI we have finite resources and hardware. It’s almost impossible for us to replicate live conditions at scale. A lot of issues only rear their heads when we have 1,000s or 10,000s of players playing. With each month that goes by, we are able to improve our processes, and testing to improve quality and delivery of content

Your honesty on this is appreciated, and I get that the promise of upcoming features is one of the biggest things keeping people around, but don't you think your "aggressive release schedule" is a little bold for a small developer? With all due respect, I find it a little hard to believe that you lack the people to play enough games to lure the obvious "excessive LRM dive point" bug out from hiding.

#4 FrostCollar

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1454 posts
  • LocationEast Coast, US

Posted 31 May 2013 - 11:26 AM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 31 May 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

FrostCollar: Do you track the relative use of Light/Medium/Heavy/Assault mechs over time? Care to share any insights? I've always been curious about what those relative usage rates are, especially given talk about how some classes of mech are harder to play than others (Spider experts, I salute you).
A: Yes we track usage.

Awww.

#5 Mishatron

    Member

  • Veteran Founder
  • 72 posts
  • LocationLondon, UK

Posted 31 May 2013 - 11:30 AM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 31 May 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

Sentinel373: Is there any chance we will get to see the letter designation next to the players name when pressing Tab or have it there with the kill message. It often gets confusing at the end of the match who is still standing.
A: We show everyone’s Dead/Alive/Disconnected status in the player list. Can you expand on that thought?


This is something I've mentioned myself on these forums (I think it was before the Open Beta forum wipe though). The problem is that in organised teams, no one refers to enemy mechs by the name of the pilot, we say things like "Centurion Bravo" or "Atlas Hotel", using the A-H designators the game assigns them on your HUD.

Therefore, it would be exceedingly useful if these letters showed up in kill messages and on the scoreboard, alongside pilot names, e.g. "PGI_Garth (F) was destroyed by Mishatron"

It might also be nice to show which mech a player was using in those kill messages too - if I know one of my teammates is engaged with a hunchback and a centurion, it'd help to know which of them they killed.

#6 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4616 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 31 May 2013 - 11:33 AM

Meh.

You really didn't address the balance issues at all and continue to cling to this "We'll address it when it comes up in the cycle" style instead of "It's really badly broken and needs to be looked at now".

#7 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4616 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 31 May 2013 - 11:38 AM

Also can you elaborate on why having 10,000 people playing vs. 16 people in a match playing effects seeing things like the LRM flight path is messed up. Or that splash damage is insane?

I'm very confused as to how that would matter.

That makes sense in games like WoW which have a persistent world...but when each match is it's own instance...it seems 16 people in your test environment should see the same thing as 16 people on the live server if you are doing this correctly.

View PostBryan Ekman, on 31 May 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

Ask the Devs #39
It’s almost impossible for us to replicate live conditions at scale. A lot of issues only rear their heads when we have 1,000s or 10,000s of players playing.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 31 May 2013 - 11:41 AM.


#8 Deathlike

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10387 posts
  • LocationBoston Strong

Posted 31 May 2013 - 11:42 AM

Quote

Levi Porphyrogenitus: Has PGI considered removing splash damage from missiles altogether?
A: Yes we have, but have elected to balance them differently. Currently the splash damage on all missiles is set to 5cm (effectively removing it) and will investigate if it should change any further in either direction.


Figures.

Quote

Mizore: The Seismic Sensors module is very strong at the moment. Any plans on changing it the way, that at least light and medium mechs can move nearly undedected for example at a speed of 50kph or below? In my opinion this would strengthen their role as scouts or harassers.
A: Yes. We’re tuning right now, expect tweaks mid-June to bring it in line a bit. More details forthcoming.


There is going to be a point where this grinding wait will annoy people further.

Quote

Sentinel373: Is there any chance we will get to see the letter designation next to the players name when pressing Tab or have it there with the kill message. It often gets confusing at the end of the match who is still standing.
A: We show everyone’s Dead/Alive/Disconnected status in the player list. Can you expand on that thought?


How about a simple coloring of names in the kill-death messages?

Deathlike (blue/teammate) kills Enemy Target (red/enemy)

That's all most people are asking for.

Quote

Hoaggie: How are feedback and suggestions from the forums weighted in the use of game development? To clarify, I see many well worded suggestions where people cite examples and sources in the forum threads, but I see many many more “X needs nerfed” or “Y needs a buff” responses that seem to drown out the ones who have sound reasons backing their ideas. Also, how do you factor in people who do not complain because they think everything is fine?
A: As you can imagine we get lots of feedback, some more qualified than others. We weigh community feedback carefully against our design goals, long term plans, and telemetry. Often what is perceived to be an issue, say Win by Capture in Assault, is not actually as big of an issue. When design goals, planning, feedback, and telemetry align to say something needs adjusting, we jump on that quickly.


It IS an issue in many instances. It seems to me that you're not reading the context of why some of these issues come up, like capping on Alpine, which is much less of a problem in say Frozen City. It might not be gamebreaking, but it is certainly an issue that comes up, especially in Conquest, where traversing cap points on Alpine is a lot more tedious than Frozen City.

#9 StaggerCheck

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1268 posts
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 31 May 2013 - 11:43 AM

With all due respect to the effort taken to compile and answer these questions, some of the answers were so short as to barely qualify as a sentence.

#10 Shakespeare

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 365 posts
  • LocationGainesville, FL USA

Posted 31 May 2013 - 11:49 AM

Thank you again for the set of mostly direct and applicable answers. It's good to hear that balance is a frequent point of discussion, as is the weight of feedback. Also, reigning in seismic! I'm looking forward to the new UI, and any changes to reduce the utility of the 'long' game vs brawl/maneuver.

Keep up the good work! I know a lot of us are loud and critical, but trust me, there are a lot of us who love where the game is headed overall, and are very enthusiastic about seeing the team succeed in their goals.

#11 Jabilo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 573 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 12:18 PM

Nice one. Good read.

#12 Rashhaverak

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 491 posts
  • LocationMajestic Waterfowl Sanctuary

Posted 31 May 2013 - 12:19 PM

Wow, I have to wait until next Christmas to purchase MC at the $1 = 300 MC price point.

That sucks, but now I'm really glad that I didn't buy the last color set that went on sale. Need to save MC to buy mech bays for the next six months... and that will be a long time without a premium account. Oh well... what's a boy to do, other than wait or spend at the higher price?

I'll hold out for the 1/300. Age has granted me patience.

#13 Biruke

    Com Guard

  • Volunteer Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 3323 posts
  • LocationMsk, RF, Terra

Posted 31 May 2013 - 12:23 PM

I wonder why the question with the most "likes" in the thread had not even been mentioned?
http://mwomercs.com/...39#entry2380139

#14 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4616 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 31 May 2013 - 12:23 PM

View PostRashhaverak, on 31 May 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:

Wow, I have to wait until next Christmas to purchase MC at the $1 = 300 MC price point.

That sucks, but now I'm really glad that I didn't buy the last color set that went on sale. Need to save MC to buy mech bays for the next six months... and that will be a long time without a premium account. Oh well... what's a boy to do, other than wait or spend at the higher price?

I'll hold out for the 1/300. Age has granted me patience.


Was thinking the same thing.

#15 Chavette

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2806 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 12:24 PM

Quote

StalaggtIKE: UI 2.0 is looking really great. Are there any plans to synchronize a web interface to the mechlab, to allow for out of game mech purchases, weapon grouping and customizations? Then we can waste more of our work time. Thanks.
A: Eventually we would love this to happen. There’s a lot of architecture work, engineering, and web development to make this a go. I don’t expect this to be done in 2013, as we have other aspects of the game to finish first.


There are a few sites out there that do this, how about just buying the software off one, instead of putting a hundred man-hours building your own, if the costs are better?

Also +1 for the survey on launcher/patcher!!

#16 FrostCollar

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1454 posts
  • LocationEast Coast, US

Posted 31 May 2013 - 12:30 PM

View PostBiruke, on 31 May 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

I wonder why the question with the most "likes" in the thread had not even been mentioned?
http://mwomercs.com/...39#entry2380139

James Heywood: After playing War thunder recently I noticed they had a post match replay option which you could save to your HDD. Is there a chance we will see this function added in the future? since many players like to make fan vids and recruitment videos, this would be a major help and a great way to advertise MWO through youtube etc.
A: Yes, sometime in 2014.

#17 Biruke

    Com Guard

  • Volunteer Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 3323 posts
  • LocationMsk, RF, Terra

Posted 31 May 2013 - 12:33 PM

View PostFrostCollar, on 31 May 2013 - 12:30 PM, said:

James Heywood: After playing War thunder recently I noticed they had a post match replay option which you could save to your HDD. Is there a chance we will see this function added in the future? since many players like to make fan vids and recruitment videos, this would be a major help and a great way to advertise MWO through youtube etc.
A: Yes, sometime in 2014.

oh, thanks. I hope it's the same.

#18 BlueSanta

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 368 posts
  • LocationUS

Posted 31 May 2013 - 12:39 PM

Not a particularly sensitive move to not address the needs of colorblind players until after launch, concerning the HUD, one of the most important interfaces in this game (if not THE most important).

There needs to be an official timeline on when previous chassis will reflect installed weapons. Almost everyone really wants to see this feature and it would enhance the aesthetics of the game.

The whole Awesome chassis is terrible right now. Even a great Awesome pilot is not as useful to his team as a good Highlander or Stalker pilot because of the weaknesses of the chassis. It's a shame because the model is beautiful.

The splash or Streak targeting mechanic is still broken, as I am still being primarily cored by Streaks. I am sick and tired of these missiles operating by magic and not logic and physics.

Why you put the Seismic Sensor into the game in its current state, I do not know. It is a wallhack and it once again brings into question your judgement.

High water must affect movement speed. This is not an option.

I would greatly like to see a pilot better rewarded in XP for kill assists. With the system the way it is right now, it is easier for heavier or more deadly chassis to grind XP because they more easily get kills.

I am glad that you are finally admitting that you need to tweak the Catapult head hitbox.

You just can't keep putting out bugged patches. Whatever you have to do to prevent that, you must do for this game to succeed.

I thought this was a pretty good ATD. The quality of your answers has improved over time and I appreciate it.

#19 Acid Phase

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 506 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey

Posted 31 May 2013 - 12:39 PM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 31 May 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

Ask the Devs #39

Asmudius Heng: Russ Bullock replied to a player on Twitter who enquired why PGI didnt like the idea of hardpoint sizes. Russ replied:"@AC1DPHA5E we’re not against it, it's been discussed.”
Is it possible to get an elabolration on what that discussion was so we know if this is 1) still being discussed and why, 2) rejected for X reason.
A: No further news on this thought process. If we reject it, I’ll let you know.



Very vague. So Russ says it was discussed. Initial reactions to the topic?

#20 MustrumRidcully

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 9861 posts

Posted 31 May 2013 - 12:49 PM

Quote

Karl Streiger: Do you consider any changes on the armor distribution? Most players aim directly for the Center - some for the side torso - but in most cases it is cheaper (less time consuming to kill the target)
Shouldn't the gain of disarming a target first be increased over the kill shot? My Ideas were (CT 28%, Legs 13%, SideToros 15% and Arms 7% of total armor)

A: Armor values are based off the TT values.

This is a bit of a non-useful answer, isn't it? We know where the values come from, Karl is asking if you ever considered changing them because the values are based on the TT game, a game that definitely did not feature mouse-aiming or convergence.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users