Jump to content

- - - - -

Why The Hate?


32 replies to this topic

#21 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 30 April 2016 - 03:01 PM

Saw something I wanted to address:

View PostMarineErrant, on 30 April 2016 - 08:10 AM, said:

15) Gauss rifle charging up is silly. In lore, those things blow up when hit. To me this implies they're always charged ready to fire during combat. So, instead we get a delay to charge followed by a cool down. Why not just make a longer cooldown to factor capacitor recharge?

I could see that and initially as one of those forum warriors -- back then who kept petitioning this amazing developer back in 2012, which was like a 'god' to me because unlike any other F2P developer I have ever seen or any developer for that matter, they seemed to listen to and actually implement suggestions from the community -- I had suggested something like a 6 to 8 second coodlwon akin to Mechwarrior Living Legends.

But as for Battletech. First recall that Battletech as a tabletop game is a summary.

Now in simplified (basic) Battletech, yes. It's easy to believe it is always charged as the danger is always there. The 60 meter minimum accurate range (which leads to a penalty to the pilot's gunnery skill that must be overcome by chance of dice) is supposed to be due to a combination of a long barrel to line up (or its weight) and whether or not the weapon is able to fire "in time." to make the hit, supposedly due to the charge up.

Advanced rules: Gauss Rifle gets a toggle. Powered / unpowered or "Charged" and "not charged." "Primed" and "dormant." It can only explode while charged. It can be left 'charged' or primed as long as you want but constantly carries the risk of exploding. Dormant, you're unable to use it within that 10 second timeslice or turn. You did not have to charge for every shot.

Basically, you could interpret this as it takes between 4 and 10 seconds to charge the Gauss Rifle. Since MWO runs at 3x the firing speed, that's roughly 1.34 to 3.34 seconds to charge the Gauss Rifle... but so long as its charged you can fire it as fast as it can reload... taking note that if the Gauss Rifle has as much health as it has slots (7 for IS, 6 for Clan in order to completely destroy it), it would only take 1 HP of damage to cause it to explode and this could be done through armor very easily.. (MWO's Gauss Rifle has 5 health before it explodes). If uncharged, that 1 HP of damage would simply disable it.

Given how MWO is, I think this is probably the most "Battletech" solution PGI has come up with and is balanced with the softer risk of explosion. The way MWO does ammo explosions and even the way BT does ammo explosions... Gauss Rifle is safer than even carrying a ton of machine gun ammo if not for the slot issue making GRs easier to hit and all ammo having 10 health (instead of 1).

Of course if Gauss Rifles were among the front loaded weapon types of all of Battletech in MWO (among Missiles and PPCs)... instead of just another one in a list of over a dozen in MWO, then it'd totally be worth either style of charge up.

Spoiler


#22 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 6,575 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 30 April 2016 - 03:21 PM

View PostAgent005, on 30 April 2016 - 07:47 AM, said:

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to ask this question (or if this question is even appropriate to ask in this forum period), but I'm just asking as a new player who's jumping into Mechwarrior for the first time. A lot of people around the internet have shared fond memories of playing the older Mechwarrior games when they were kids, but the minute Mechwarrior: Online is brought up, they instantly turn bitter and have nothing but bad things to say about this game and how it ruined the franchise. It ultimately doesn't affect me, but it's still something I find a bit jarring. Why does this game get so much hate outside of its fanbase? Is it just because it's free to play? Because even though I have some problems with its business model (mainly concerning the pricing of cosmetic items), this game seems to have a much better F2P model than most others I've seen. I'm not in any way meaning to flame bait or troll with this topic; I'm just genuinely curious why this game seems to court such a bad reputation.

Well, long story short, there are a lot of bitter, childish people who are inconsolably hurt and angry because the game didn't give them their way. To be fair, they actually had some legitimate grievances once upon a time - slow development, long-standing bugs, that sort of thing. And some of the "bittervets" actually just quit a while ago and remember only the bad times when you mention the game.

OTHERS, however, even once those issues were resolved, continue to haunt forums, other people's forums, simply to complain venomously about the game. They've gotten even the subject of MWO banned from the Star Citizen forums, and I'm told that other communities are just getting tired of the endless carping any time MWO does something. They engaged in a deliberate campaign of misinformation and outright lies when the Steam Release happened, and their actual stated objective is to destroy the game or get its developers fired - this, when asked, was the only thing they themselves said would satisfy them.

These vendetta-obsessed liars are not someone you want to listen to. In fact, I hunted up the boilerplate I used to respond to their misinformation posts (they all used the same lies, so I didn't feel obliged to think up new rebuttals.) I'll spoiler it for space, but it encapsulates the whole thing as best as I was able:
Spoiler

Edited by Void Angel, 30 April 2016 - 08:10 PM.


#23 Not A Real RAbbi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 1,688 posts
  • LocationDeath to Aladeen Cafe

Posted 30 April 2016 - 07:48 PM

View PostAgent005, on 30 April 2016 - 07:47 AM, said:

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to ask this question (or if this question is even appropriate to ask in this forum period), but I'm just asking as a new player who's jumping into Mechwarrior for the first time. A lot of people around the internet have shared fond memories of playing the older Mechwarrior games when they were kids, but the minute Mechwarrior: Online is brought up, they instantly turn bitter and have nothing but bad things to say about this game and how it ruined the franchise. It ultimately doesn't affect me, but it's still something I find a bit jarring. Why does this game get so much hate outside of its fanbase? Is it just because it's free to play? Because even though I have some problems with its business model (mainly concerning the pricing of cosmetic items), this game seems to have a much better F2P model than most others I've seen. I'm not in any way meaning to flame bait or troll with this topic; I'm just genuinely curious why this game seems to court such a bad reputation.


Online Gaming 101 stuff. While the game is out and being maintained, there are three groups of players. One, the VAST majority, doesn't have much to say about it one way or the other. The second, it's all fanboys spewing unicorns and rainbows over how great the thing is. And the last is salty puglords who think they know EXACTLY what would make the game PERFECT, and that the developers who've brought the game this far are a bunch of goofballs. The split is something like 90/5/5 percent, respectively, give or take depending on how weak the game really is.

I think back to the release of Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter by UbiSoft, developed for the PC by GRIN. (Haven't heard of GRIN? Yeah. Went away after GRAW2.) Like some others, I was the salty puglord who thought he knew ALL ABOUT what would work best. "Diesel is a bad engine for this game!" "Terrorist Hunt or we RIOT!" And so on. Fun fact? v1.35 patch was beta-tested by a bunch of us in the community, and contained the three main COOP game modes from the original Ghost Recon. Only, UbiSoft never green-lit that. It made it in the patch anyhow. UbiSoft was already on the hook with GRIN for GRAW2 by then. And BOY OH BOY were they SALTY A. F. We demanded and demanded, and eventually a really cool developer gave in and slipped something into the game that the publisher wasn't okay with. And that developer is GONE now.

Anyhow.

No. Those salty puglords aren't the majority of us. They aren't really representative of much other than themselves. And it's okay. We're SUPPOSED to have opinions. Let it slide off. If you like the game, play the game. It's not going away any time soon...

#24 MW Waldorf Statler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,457 posts
  • LocationGermany/Berlin

Posted 30 April 2016 - 10:22 PM

game main difference between Board game and real-time

In Boardgame there is no way to target, they positioned his Mech, selects weapons, the rest is randomly decided by rolling the dice ... In the board Game you can not aim the cockpit of a still standing mech in 30 m distance, the course brings many decisions, because many are not implemented from very abstract board game...

many thought they get a real-time combat game with the completely abstract board game rules

#25 magicians

    Rookie

  • The Bolt
  • 1 posts

Posted 01 May 2016 - 04:00 AM

I'm very new to this game and I love it. Have already spent $80 and no regret.

#26 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 01 May 2016 - 08:59 AM

View PostOld MW4 Ranger, on 30 April 2016 - 10:22 PM, said:

game main difference between Board game and real-time

In Boardgame there is no way to target, they positioned his Mech, selects weapons, the rest is randomly decided by rolling the dice ... In the board Game you can not aim the cockpit of a still standing mech in 30 m distance, the course brings many decisions, because many are not implemented from very abstract board game...

many thought they get a real-time combat game with the completely abstract board game rules


I could address that with something that might blow your mind.

In Battletech there are instances in which you can aim, these are when the target's pilot is unable to react. Whether the mech is powered down, or immobile, or the pilot is unconscious. Interestingly enough being knocked down isn't enough, only when the pilot cannot react at all is this an option.

Now consider this: All mech-mounted autocannons are stated to have ranges of several thousand kilometers. However established accurate ranges depict AC/20 as 270 meters, AC/10 as 450 meters, etc., etc. Ever asked why?

The established ranges are meant to depict "expected ranges to be able to hit an average-sized target (10-12 meters long or tall) at the pilot's gunnery skill level without any undue difficulty or strain. Then there's a penalty if the target is in motion, another if the shooter is in motion, and additional penalties for either if the speeds are beyond cruising.

Now, even at stationary versus stationary, there's a chance of missing. Also you can't "aim" at a stationary target or one that is laying down but has a conscious pilot and not paralyzed. Furthermore, chances of hitting smaller targets like arms and legs are higher than larger targets like torsos. Why is this?

The answer might shock you. The roll is intended to include the possibility that the target could become aware of you and dodge or engage in defensive measures against a pilot that is, in fact, aiming. Assuming the pilot always aimed "center mass" like any soldier would when firing at a moving target, the increased chances of hitting side torsos and arms makes a bit of sense when you consider the enemy may start torso twisting to spread damage or throw an arm in the way. Furthermore, blatant misses for the average pilot especially at close range are actually explained by the enemy having "dodged," a move actually added into Solaris 7's much shorter time slices in order to accommodate less "summarized" battles by providing higher detail and choice.

This happens in real-time, too. The thing is instead of "dice roll chance", the enemy physically tries to defend itself by torso twisting and dodging, slipping behind buildings and re-emerging to fire again.

The real difference between the two is that Battletech knows its a summary. So instead of ACs that fire 2 to 100 shots to get their rated damage, and lasers that need to hit 1 to 8 times, and pulse lasers (which fire like machine guns btw in BT descriptions) that need to hit up to 20 times, and so on and so forth, Battletech uses "this weapon hit here, take off 20 HP" "That weapon hit there. Take off 3 HP."

Real time is supposed to know a Marauder's 120mm Whirlwind AC/5 is supposed to deliver 3-4 shots per second for 3 to 4 seconds before changing cassettes (magazines that are labelled on the ammo display computer as a single "Round" to conserve space on a limited screen.) This means that it deals between 0.56 (rounded) damage at most to 0.3125 damage at least [assuming a standard blow, higher for direct blows and lower for glancing blows] per shot in anywhere between 9 and 16 shots (depending on the book or in some cases the paragraph). Keep in mind, this is assuming it's a Battletech in real time, so instead of 614 max armor as the Atlas has before quirks, an Atlas would have 307 max armor. A Locust 1-E would have 64 armor stock instead of 128. Now, with damages and spread like that, time to kill would be in a pretty sweet spot.

But, MWO took tabletop stats for the weapons as "literal and biblical" at first and couldn't figure out why most mechs died in less than 5 seconds. And so came double armor/structure. Then everything was just too hot, everyone shut down after a shot or two, so the first rising heat threshold in Mechwarrior history was created. Even then it took too long to kill or didn't have enough ammo or was too hot, and so PGI began tinkering with ammo counts and heat.

Yes the result is okay and yes, if you know nothing you'll love it for the game it is.
I kinda learned too much about the source material and I can see it for the game it could have been.

#27 JC Daxion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 5,230 posts

Posted 01 May 2016 - 02:41 PM

I have no clue why people do it, But it is everywhere. Just go read any PC gamer article that mentions, EA, bioware, blizzard, ubi-soft.. and the trolls come out of the woodwork about how awful they are, and how much their games suck.

for this game it boils down to a couple things, A the game is not at the place they think it should be after 4 years of development.

and B, the blame PGI, for anything and everything that does not fall under the window of what they think the game should of been by now.


I take a more realistic view on my gaming time. I only play games i enjoy, if i don't like it i move on, and don't spend another moment thinking or talking about it. Just because i don't like something, doesn't mean it will suck for everyone else. I can name tons of games that people love, that i didn't play more than a few hours because i didn't like um. Not bad games, just bad for me. But perhaps because I've been gaming since PONG in 76, I've seen it all.. And honestly, these days people really don't know what a bad game is..For instance, take Dragon age II, or mass effect III.. both come to mind as not the best games ever made, but i found both very enjoyable, both you almost never read anything good, its all how bad of games they are, or how EA ruined them.

But even great games that have glaring flaws, can still be one of the best games ever made.. AKA pathing and inventory management in baldur's gate. and an ungodly number of bugs that took the community years to fix. I know i helped with many.. But despite those flaws which would bring the trolls out in force in todays world that game is still a classic. That game might not even get played due to all the bad hype it would get in our modern social media world just look at the new expansion, that people are ripping because of one NPC and 3 lines of dialog.. Everyone has an opinion and by golly, i will make the world know it. I will protect everyone from the awful thing i hate, because if i don't like it, no one should. Or the ever popular, You enjoy the game, and have nothing bad to say about it so you are automatically a fanboy.. Somehow liking of loving something makes you a jerk to some and anything you say is invalid because you are just a "fanboy".. I don't get it.


Honestly, just go read the general forums.. For people that say they like something, so many never have anything positive to say ever.. And honestly if i had half the dislike that many seem to, i'd of left and never looked back a long time ago. I mean, when people post threads about hating town halls, and they should be stopped, and then others say Yea! Do you need more proof, that it seams like no mater what you do, some people will be angry about it.. Instead of, I don't like townhalls, i won't watch them, It's I don't like town halls and no one else should either!

I really enjoy this game, It's not perfect, but it is way better than it was even 2 years ago. I for one look at the game like Eve.. Look where Eve started, and how far its come 10+ years later. I am hoping to see something similar in this game, with pve, campaigns, deeper CW, deeper game modes ect. I never played the TT game, but i played mech 3&4 and mech commander 1&2 to death.. to me this is the best balanced of all of them,, and funny how they 3 &4 are said to be great games, but they both have pretty big flaws, and lots of bugs, but still i put tons of hours into them despite the flaws, and loved um all.


Honestly to me, if you never have anything nice to say about something, it's best to move on, and just not say anything at all..

Edited by JC Daxion, 01 May 2016 - 02:50 PM.


#28 Tarl Cabot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Tai-sho
  • Tai-sho
  • 7,643 posts
  • LocationImperial City, Luthien - Draconis Combine

Posted 01 May 2016 - 05:09 PM

http://mwomercs.com/...y-an-education/

Check out myomer bundles and battle computer. Basically, the pilot did not actual AIM the weapons, he used the cross hairs to place over the target and the battle computer brought the weapons in-line and issued a tone when it had a high probability of hitting the target. For torso mounted weapons that was servos/etc, for arm-mounted weapons that was the myomer bundles.

Here is where heat would affect the myomer bundles. Higher the heat, the more difficulty the bundles had holding their position.

Quote

Incidentally, Myomers impose one of the primary limitations on the temperature a BattleMech can operate at, because as the Myomers heat up, they become more electrically resistive and thus less efficient, and less predictable at the same time. This translates into a 'Mech moving sluggishly and erratically and having trouble bringing its weapons to bear. In fact, if Myomers become too hot, they will actually cook themselves, which results in the black smoke seen rising from extremely overheated BattleMechs in combat. The acti-strandular materials in Myomers do not respond well to high temperatures.


Now, several have not been asking to have everything about Battletech to be part of the game, but there are items that, when not part of the foundation, causing gaming issues that then have to be compensated in other ways, ways that for a new player would be counter-intuitive, such as Ghost Heat, and even with that popularity of laser vomit, especially in the Invasion module of Faction Warfare.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 01 May 2016 - 05:14 PM.


#29 TRODDEN

    Rookie

  • The Deadly
  • The Deadly
  • 6 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 10:04 AM

PSR? What a ******* JOKE! Only mech game in the WORLD where you can do everything right, your team wins, and your pilot skill rating goes DOWN because you have -2 team damage. Just more BS for an imperfect game and yet another way to SCREW the player.

#30 Horseman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 4,694 posts
  • LocationPoland

Posted 02 November 2020 - 10:19 AM

1. Dude, this thread was DEAD for FOUR YEARS. WTF?
2. Your PSR won't drop because of 2 team damage. It will drop if you have low overall match score, and that's something you have control over and can fix with the right mechs and tactics.

#31 martian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,580 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 11:56 AM

View PostTRODDEN, on 02 November 2020 - 10:04 AM, said:

PSR? What a ******* JOKE! Only mech game in the WORLD where you can do everything right, your team wins, and your pilot skill rating goes DOWN because you have -2 team damage. Just more BS for an imperfect game and yet another way to SCREW the player.

Your PSR did not go down because of those two points of the deam damage. Your two points of the team damage mean absolutely nothing.

Your PSR went down because your Match Score was not good enough when compared to the other players - both on the winning and on the losing team.


Check this pair of screenshots, please. I made them a week ago.

Note that I was on the winning side - as you were - and I did not two, but ninety-two points of the team damage.

Well, that artillery strike fell a bit short. Posted Image

Posted Image


And yet, I saw the green arrow and my PSR went up.

So ask yourself if your Match Score was good enough when compared to other 23 players?


Posted Image

#32 Aidan Crenshaw

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 3,563 posts

Posted 02 November 2020 - 01:52 PM

Here, take a look, and then let this thread die again.

https://youtu.be/JFqlZXOVtdw

#33 Ekson Valdez

    Volunteer Moderator

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 688 posts

Posted 03 November 2020 - 04:40 AM



There are other, recent topics about the PSR changes. Please use those.
Now for this old fella...
Posted Image








1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users