Jump to content

Paul, Your Game Is Broken


137 replies to this topic

#81 jeffsw6

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,258 posts
  • LocationLouisville, KY (suburbs)

Posted 08 July 2013 - 04:53 PM

View PostNicholas Carlyle, on 08 July 2013 - 04:43 PM, said:

...
smart stuff
...
smart stuff
...
uh-huh
...
And it might actually make sense to shoot an AC/10, followed by a pair of large lasers in the same location, and then follow up with some LRM's.

You had me until you said LRMs. Please edit your post and get rid of that ridiculous babble. LRMs are never going to work and certainly not in a way that you'd want to shoot them at an opponent you'd already been firing at for a while with your 22 tons of other weapons. You won't have enough room to boat 60 LRM launchers!

Come on, Nick. Giant Internet robots is serious stuff. You can't just make crap up like useful LRMs and mixed builds!

#82 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 5,958 posts
  • LocationMiddletown, DE

Posted 08 July 2013 - 05:01 PM

View Postjeffsw6, on 08 July 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:

You had me until you said LRMs. Please edit your post and get rid of that ridiculous babble. LRMs are never going to work and certainly not in a way that you'd want to shoot them at an opponent you'd already been firing at for a while with your 22 tons of other weapons. You won't have enough room to boat 60 LRM launchers!

Come on, Nick. Giant Internet robots is serious stuff. You can't just make crap up like useful LRMs and mixed builds!


I like the concept of LRM's. I've never been a fan of point and shoot. It's a bit difficult for me when I play on my X-box (just never got good at perfect aim with a controller), but with a mouse? Against slow *** giant stompy robots? It's boring.

LRM's make me use other parts of my brain, I have to worry a lot more about positioning, mobility and such.

I don't know, maybe I'm dumb.

I just wish PGI would acknowledge some of this stuff with something more concrete.

#83 ArmandTulsen

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,184 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 05:54 PM

I've lost all faith in PGI.

#84 SilentWolff

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 2,174 posts
  • LocationNew Las Vegas

Posted 08 July 2013 - 05:57 PM

View PostMultitallented, on 08 July 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

That's rich! PPCs had nothing to do with it! LMFAO

Face it, you just love the fact that MWO == MW4 with stale meta of poptarting. The devs lost that game in the mech lab. There's a reason you brought all PPCs for 2 out of the 3 matches. Even with your horrendous mech choices (seriously HBK-4P with 3 ERPPCs?) it was obvious who was going to win. Nobody agrees with you. Everyone agrees that PPCs are OP.

Also you wouldn't know competitive game play if it hit you in the balls.


I didnt say PPC's had nothing to do with it, I said very little to do with it because of the quality of opponent we were facing. As usual, your reading comprehension is trash, much like your piloting skills. And lets not forget your guild has played 2nd fiddle to us since the days of MW4. I know you want to continue patting yourself over those close beta tourneys, but newsflash to you, they didnt mean squat then and no one even remembers them now. So congratulations, on winning.... nothing.

#85 Corvus Antaka

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 8,310 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationInner Sphere

Posted 08 July 2013 - 06:48 PM

what if Paul's hands are tied by someone else who wants things a certain way, and that way is a bad way, but they have more power and say so, and are foolish and demanding?

Big company, lots of employees. Blaming Paul is like blaming 1 fruit on the tree - you only blame him because he is the obvious one to blame, and his position with PGI.

Maybe another is the real culprit behind the bad decisions everyone here is hunting for.

Whats sad to me is posts like this "I've lost all faith in PGI." when we've seen some significiant progress in balance and gameplay over the past year.

All that said, if I compare development here to Tribes:Ascend and their dev team, or working on WoW since early alpha, PGI still has a ton and then some to learn throughout their organization if they want to climb to new hieghts.

#86 Livebait

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 411 posts
  • LocationDrop ship Alpha, drinking beer

Posted 08 July 2013 - 06:50 PM

What would go a long way to smooth out the rough edges of this broken game, is the ability to choose what crappy map you will play on and a lobby so you and the opposing team can decide what mechs and load out you can bring to make the match more fun and interesting. What is the point of a mech lab if you don't know what map to design a mech for. The mech will always be gimped. Just really dumb game design.

#87 Victor Morson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 6,370 posts
  • LocationAnder's Moon

Posted 08 July 2013 - 06:50 PM

This will only get solved when PGI reaches out to the better teams in this game, and starts polling them for opinions and feedback and then listening to it, trying some ideas, even if they aren't so sure they'll work - esp. if more than one is saying it.

People keep thinking they need to balance based on the opinion of the masses, but honestly, they will never understand what they're asking for fully - they just don't have the time and experience to understand the deeper values in the game.. and neither do the developers, thanks to emergent gameplay they cannot possibly anticipate.

There are a number of great teams out there (including SJR that spawned this discussion), and I think they would provide solutions and changes that would make everyone happy in the end, or as least as many people as possible. Please take a look at the player run leagues, and talk to some of the better units within - and beware a handful of numerically popular but very poor teams out there at the moment. They're full of very bad misinformation.

Try some of what we're saying on the coming test server. See how it plays out. Listen to our feedback on the changes after it's been implemented.. we're not above making errors, but I'd like to think we can recognize them!

Anyway, I'm on a bit of a rant here but all I'm saying is you can fix this, just get an email out to the teams that can help give you the feedback you need to do so.

EDIT: Please do not lump the hardcore or competitive players in with the people insisting on TableTop Is The Bible group. I love both Table Top and MechWarrior and the people I'm talking about want to see this the best MechWarrior game to exist, and for that, the spirit of the property is more important than the numbers on a chart. Our interests are purely to help this game be a more diverse, deep experience on it's own merits. I really hate that sometimes those two groups get viewed at as the same.

Edited by Victor Morson, 08 July 2013 - 06:54 PM.


#88 Insidious Johnson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 2,417 posts
  • Location"This is Johnson, I'm cored"

Posted 08 July 2013 - 07:04 PM

Thing is Victor, those teams have tried. Our input isn't wanted or discounted and over-ridden by those with power but no skill. The focus has so very long been on "the lone wolf experience" that they have no clue about any other, since the disenfranchised have moved to greener pastures. They've not given dissent credence, just shuffled it off to a forgotten subforum to die. In the process, they've failed to realize the golden rule means that in the end they've not so much "done unto others" as they've done to themselves. At this point, they'd need to seriously reach out to the competitive gaming community and CATER to their needs as inclusively as much as they have previously excluded since closed beta.

#89 InRev

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 1,236 posts
  • LocationConnecticut, USA

Posted 08 July 2013 - 07:16 PM

View Postjeffsw6, on 08 July 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:

You had me until you said LRMs. Please edit your post and get rid of that ridiculous babble. LRMs are never going to work and certainly not in a way that you'd want to shoot them at an opponent you'd already been firing at for a while with your 22 tons of other weapons. You won't have enough room to boat 60 LRM launchers!

Come on, Nick. Giant Internet robots is serious stuff. You can't just make crap up like useful LRMs and mixed builds!

Isn't it a shame? AMS implementation, ECM, and the way they do 0 damage at min range instead of suffering an accuracy penalty have made LRMs an all-or-nothing weapon: either balls-deep with 60 missile salvos, or nothing at all. It's a crying shame because they could be an ideal lightweight, long-range option for mediums and even lights if they were actually usable in sub-30 volleys. An LRM 10 is only 5 tons and could do around 7 average damage at 1000m. That's perfect! Instead, what we have is AMS devouring LRM-5s and 10s like cake, ECM making Tag mandatory or else, and LRMs a completely worthless liability at sub 180m ranges.

It's perhaps the most extreme example of a weapon mechanic that favors boating disproportionately (although Lord knows there are plenty in this game). The AMS thing in particular makes me wonder ¿"qué ******" is the balance team thinking?

#90 AntharPrime

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,144 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 08 July 2013 - 07:43 PM

View PostSilentWolff, on 08 July 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

While our unit has enjoyed the semi celebrity status we have garnered beating up on the devs, I think there a few critical points that should be mentioned.

The OP only posted 2 of the 3 games we played against the devs. Thanks to Monky for posting the third game. The reason this is important is 2 fold. First, we used no PPC boats on the third game. It was all missles and lasers, with maybe a PPC or 2. Secondly, as can be seen by the 3 vids, the Devs just arent good players. This fact is important because as we can see by this thread, it has devolved into a PPC flame thread, when in fact PPC's had very little to do with our victorys. The victorys came from skill and understanding the current meta of what weapons work best in concert with one another. I find it to be a bit disconcerting that the devs off all people, prefer to blame weapons for their losses, rather than teamwork. It's like putting a high school basketball team against the Harlem Globetrotters and when they lose horribly, saying the basketball was overpowered.

I would invite the devs to come play with us for awhile, or any competitive unit for that matter, to truely get a feeling for what the game is really like in competitive gameplay and then balance the game according to that experience. The game would be better in the long run for it.

View PostPunkass, on 08 July 2013 - 12:33 PM, said:

I'll agree, the devs were just plain bad. I don't expect them to play like competitive players either. Either way, it was still rather cathartic to see some devs, who have been pretty quiet on weapon balancing, get outright schooled, and start to whine a little.

View PostSplitpin, on 08 July 2013 - 02:09 PM, said:

What I saw was a well organised and practiced team wipe a group of people who don't play a lot. That has little to do what weapons were being used. And to those who think nerfing convergence will help you. Think about it, convergence helps the average player more than the elite player - huh how? Take a 1 on 1 scenario where say both mechs are pretty damaged with say 30-40 points of CT remaining, with convergence the average player who hits his target say 50% of the time has a chance against the elite player who hits his target say 80% of the time. It's a one shot either way but the average player just might do it. Without convergence, such that say each weapon was fired separately and it was going to take 3,4,5 CT shots either way then the elite player is going to win it every time.

View PostRebas Kradd, on 08 July 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

It's silly to say that the lesson of that video can ONLY be either PPCs or the devs' inexperience. Obviously both are issues.

I would like to see some video from the actual QA people playing the game, because if that 20-minute video is representative of PGI's best understanding of the game...well, yeesh. No offense devs, but standing still out in the open to fire LRMs? Not knowing how to ready up? Not calling targets? Getting split up all to hell? I hope you guys have some much better players hiding somewhere, so that we can be reassured that your efforts are being informed by actual game experience.


These pretty much sums it up. I have been pugging since I started and even a pug team with a little teamwork can take out a PPC/Gauss sniping 8-man drop. The PGI team's problem is that there was virtually no teamwork, they didn't focus fire and they practically stood still out in the open to engage the enemy. Most of the time they would loose an arm or side torso before they would even look in the direction of the enemy fire.

My own mech garage has all types of weapon loadouts. I even have a few boats in there, but all of my mech loadouts are successful. You just have to adjust your tactics and work with your team.

#91 KingCobra

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 2,726 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 08 July 2013 - 08:08 PM

View PostBloody Moon, on 08 July 2013 - 03:58 PM, said:


So how would that stop the PPC boats from dominating? PPCs would travel at 1000m/s which is roughly where the Gauss is atm, most players can already hit lights with Gauss Rifles even if the target moves at 150km/h.


Well first like I said double or triple the speed, acceleration and turning rate R-L torso turning speed is ok then cut the weapons speed in half. After that I would limit all mech chassis to 2 large weapons max like 1 erppc &1 gauss etc. Same with LRM20 and LRM 15 2 per chassis. Smaller medium weapons limit to max 4 per mech chassis. Small weapons max 6 per chassis. This would limit the total max damage of the mechs using a alpha strike by half. Only other way would be to make all weapons splash damage weapons to distribute the max weapons damage per alpha strike across the whole mechs armor.

Edited by KingCobra, 08 July 2013 - 08:11 PM.


#92 Dr B00t

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 496 posts

Posted 08 July 2013 - 08:12 PM

View PostLivewyr, on 07 July 2013 - 04:45 PM, said:


Hmm.. why do you get to mount so many PPCs? And yet not AC10s..

Supposed to be heat.. but now it's not heat.

I get so tired of having to remind people of that while they blindly blame it on convergence in a real time movement game...

obviously you dont understand what is meant by the word "convergence"

Edited by Dr B00t, 08 July 2013 - 08:13 PM.


#93 D34K

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 304 posts
  • LocationBrighton, UK

Posted 09 July 2013 - 12:01 AM

This is the most important thread posted on these forums in a long, long time. Although I'd love to fuel the flames of another KaoS vs. KE thread (because we haven't had enough of those), it would be cool if we kept epeen waving out of here so we don't lose the points being made here.

Roughly, these are the key points:

1. PPCs are currently not balanced and proposed plans to penalise so-called boating is commonly regarded a "butterfly-on-a-wheel" approach. Any balancing needs to be part of a wider review of all weapon systems, modules, and mech hardpoints to make other playstyles at least somewhat competitive. This needs to happen now before any clan tech really ruins things.

2. The developers and their chosen friends from the community (who have privileged access to early builds) are truly awful at the game: from mechlab to battlefield, these players are not even playing the same game as competitive merc units. Any balancing of the game needs to be driven by the knowledge of the most competitive players, who, patch after patch, balance after balance, almost immediately find catastrophic holes in the game's mechanics.

If PGI want a specification or white paper on how to balance their game there will be no shortage of volunteers from the competitive scene.

#94 Kin3ticX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 2,926 posts
  • LocationSalt Mines of Puglandia

Posted 09 July 2013 - 05:44 AM

Let me invoke something even more unpopular than nerfing weapons. Nerfing goons.

***New 3rd gamemode, Tonnage Limit 230 tons per lance + Assault***

See if you can bring 4 PPC highlanders or stalkers with that!

IMO just way too many Assaults and Heavies too even know whats truly happening with PPCs under more reasonable conditions.

Edited by Kin3ticX, 09 July 2013 - 05:46 AM.


#95 DogmeatX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 295 posts

Posted 09 July 2013 - 06:11 AM

I liked the bit at the start where the dev (I presume a developer?) pretended he didn't know how to Ready up/Launch the group. Very funny. It.. was a joke.. right? <_<

But someone briefly touched upon this in earlier post: PGI really, really and I mean REALLY needs to do a case study on Tribes Ascend and Hires (the Ascend devs) and see how/why things went wrong with that game.

People still post on their forum - I stopped months ago after I could see it wouldn't get much better and never become a real Tribes game - but just have a look through and it won't take long to find the same kinds of posts and problems, from guys who've been there since alpha too.

Now I'm not going to say MWO is rubbish, I dislike the devs etc. in fact contrary to that I mostly enjoy the game and still play, but there's still a lot to be done and improved and I think it can only help the dev team to look at something like Ascend and how that turned out.

#96 xZaOx

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 625 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 09 July 2013 - 06:14 AM

The other sad state of affairs is that obviously PGI's elo is quite low and KE's is qutie high. THey got each other 3 times in a row, tells you how many people are actually playing 8 mans. Now just wait for 12v12's. And not to mention no role warfare, or any tonnage restrictions, 12 assaults with ppc's will truly be a blast.

#97 Lord of All

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 581 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationBottom Of a Bottle

Posted 09 July 2013 - 06:36 AM

If the Lead Game Designer reads no other thread on this quagmire of a forum He needs to read this one!

#98 BellatorMonk

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 617 posts
  • LocationWallet Closed PGI Knows Why

Posted 09 July 2013 - 06:42 AM

To much being made out of the comments of the "devs" in these streams. These were some staff and friends most likely screwing around.

They knew coming into the matches they were going to lose and just about everything they say while losing the matches is tongue and cheek with no serious meaning in it.

They most likely don't care as they are code monkeys and that's it. Everyone knows the game is broken and far from any state of being a full game.

These streams don't validate anything we already don't know. The opinions and cheeky comments from these guys mean nothing also.

As to KaoS and KE competition...who cares and who are these guys anyways? There is no community warfare or proper match system in place to prove any one unit is better than the other in this game and that is one of the core problems.

#99 Acid Phase

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • 553 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationNew Jersey

Posted 09 July 2013 - 06:50 AM

View PostLord of All, on 09 July 2013 - 06:36 AM, said:

If the Lead Game Designer reads no other thread on this quagmire of a forum He needs to read this one!


By all means, let's redirect this straight to them. They definately need to see this for themselves.

@russ_bullock
@bryanekman
@Paul_Inouye

They sure have answered a few questions there.

Martin Randerson said:

@russ_bullock hi Russ. Sorry to say it but ppc boating is biggest threat to mwo since launch. Any way to lower accuracy as more are fired?


Russ Bullock said:

@mvrander I got you covered


....very vague....but it's an answer.

Edited by Acid Phase, 09 July 2013 - 06:55 AM.


#100 Lord of All

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 581 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationBottom Of a Bottle

Posted 09 July 2013 - 06:53 AM

View PostBellatorMonk, on 09 July 2013 - 06:42 AM, said:

To much being made out of the comments of the "devs" in these streams. These were some staff and friends most likely screwing around.

They knew coming into the matches they were going to lose and just about everything they say while losing the matches is tongue and cheek with no serious meaning in it.

They most likely don't care as they are code monkeys and that's it. Everyone knows the game is broken and far from any state of being a full game.

These streams don't validate anything we already don't know. The opinions and cheeky comments from these guys mean nothing also.

As to KaoS and KE competition...who cares and who are these guys anyways? There is no community warfare or proper match system in place to prove any one unit is better than the other in this game and that is one of the core problems.

Code Monkeys are the best players in a strategic game. Last, and only PGI Broadcast I watched the Team Leader was bragging about their undefeated record. Maybe they got the ELO they deserved. :D



1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users