252 replies to this topic

[Megalosauroid]

And since he was the last guy on his team in real life if he want a dev he would have just disconnected; i would have disconnected, you would have disconnected. If you're the last person on your team and you're getting greifed its fine to disconnect.

[Megalosauroid]

Buddahcjcc, on 09 April 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

you missed it so I'll try again:



bolded and underlined to help reading

also noteworthy is that two weeks after this event we lost collisions.

You can bold you help my reading all you want, ofcorse what would help more is if you didnt edit your post after i started typing my reply. As i am not in the habit of refreshing the page mid post.

Buddahcjcc, on 09 April 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

ah, thats the viable solution for this problem in your opinion then?

More viable than removing collisions from the game for 10 ******* months.

Edited by Megalosauroid, 09 April 2013 - 12:08 PM.

[Daggett]

Megalosauroid, on 09 April 2013 - 11:28 AM, said:

Firstly i'd like to say thankyou for you well typed and formatted response that actually addressed the OP and that i feel kind of bad for responding with the following:

Since every issue that has ever aggravated me has been replied to on the forums with "learn to play" i think its high time that it was my turn to say it. So i will. If you cant deal with collisions you need to learn to play, simple as that. Ive never had a problem with being repeatedly knocked down and the fact that the lions share of people who had regular problems with it are new payers as said by you supports my argument.

Thank you too for your mature response.
The problem with the "Learn to play" argument is that it is a so-called killer-argument.
Theoretically i could respond with that to everything and it's always very hard to argue against it.

It is true that each of us can learn to play around and deal with almost everything.
The difficult thing is to figure out what should be played around with skill, and what is a bug/imbalance/exploit that needs to be fixed.

And for me the issues with the collision system were clearly of the latter type. If i shoot at a lying mech i want to actually hit it and not see it teleporting to a whole different location undamaged. If a friendly medium touches my atlas by accident (which will happen regardless of how much you 'learned to play') with only a few kph of force, i expect to not fall down.

Sure you can always learn to play around those things, but they are still very annoying and simply feel totally wrong.
And the devs NEED to care for the new players, because they are the blood that keeps this game vital. No commerial online game ever survived without the payments of new guys, at least i can't tell of any that did

And when a new guy can't even shoot at an enemy because the game world behaves totally unexpected by kicking him to ground without obvious reason and afterwards warping him around (again for no reason), than chances are high that he will leave immediately. And when devs are ignoring this, their game will most probably fail.

Edited by Daggett, 09 April 2013 - 12:09 PM.

[Megalosauroid]

Buddahcjcc, on 09 April 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

NOT figure out a way to fix the problem, but to ignore it and tell ppl just to dc?

lets not figure out a way to fix the problem and instead just remove the offending feature from the game until further notice and then not communicate progress on fixing it at all.

[Ransack]

After seeing the video of Paul getting mauled by Goons, I'm not surprised that it hasn't returned yet. I'd like to see them return as much as the next guy, but I really stopped caring. I'm not going to have an aneurism because of the PGI/IPG follies. I've pretty much given up on this game.

[Megalosauroid]

Buddahcjcc, on 09 April 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

sounds good to me when collision is the offending mechanic. Like I said; removing a **** mechanic is good not bad. Its just funny that the Goons vs Paul video came out then two weeks later collisions were removed. convenient timing lol

Were you even around for collisions? If you mind me asking, you arent a founder.

[Yokaiko]

Megalosauroid, on 09 April 2013 - 12:14 PM, said:

Were you even around for collisions? If you mind me asking, you arent a founder.

Not according to his join date he wasn't.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Megalosauroid, on 09 April 2013 - 12:14 PM, said:

Were you even around for collisions? If you mind me asking, you arent a founder.

I was around during that time and I wasn't a Founder until AFTER collisions were removed, not all of us BOUGHT our way into the early closed beta...might want to remember that. And an alt account usually has a much later join date then the original account has...another thing to remember. No idea if that's the truth or not in this particular case with Buddahcjcc, but it's something to consider.

Collisions were broken, totally fubar, the fact that you don't recall how bad they were shows you weren't in the closed beta for long when they were still in or you WOULD remember that fact, as the rest of us do all too damn well.

Again, it's a lot more then just fixing the netcode that allowed the warping, it's the entire physics set up that actually computes damage properly based on tonnage of each Mech, the speeds of each Mech and so on. It's not a simple thing to do with this engine either, because it wasn't actually designed to do what PGI is trying to do in this regard.

[Yokaiko]

Kristov Kerensky, on 09 April 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:

Collisions were broken, totally fubar, the fact that you don't recall how bad they were shows you weren't in the closed beta for long when they were still in or you WOULD remember that fact, as the rest of us do all too damn well.

Wrong, this is my join date on my only account. I was invited to the beta literally a day after I applied.

I play at least 2500 games over the course of the closed beta (don't remember exactly with all of the wipes), about 60% of the 3200 games that I have played in open beta.

Again, tell me what I don't remember. Please.

[Dreamslave]

MrPenguin, on 09 April 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

They already said launch was somewhere around septembre.

That, and a good number of us realize that we would much rather have a working collision system, then the stupidly broken(and easily abused) system we had before.

That, and theirs waaayyy more things that are much higher priority that need to be dealt with first. Like fixing netcode, stabilizing the build, fixing the bugs, optimizing the game, fixing the balance issues ect...




No, its just not working properly yet.

Or did you miss that last part of what you quoted?

It wasn't "stupidly broken" or "easily abused". It punished poor piloting. Which is a good thing. The only thing that sucked about it was the minor teleporting that happened when the two mechs would stand up, but thats hardly a big deal considering the myriad bugs we are currently dealing with now. Whatever reason PGI has for not implementing collisions just aren't good reasons at all. This game desperately needs that feeling of immersion and with each and every patch we stray further and further away from that.

[Quxudica]

Megalosauroid, on 09 April 2013 - 09:15 AM, said:

from ask the devs 35:
CSLaoch: With the addition of the highlander, is there a chance that "death from above" may become possible, ex: crushing light mechs, or at least causing structural damage?
A: Yes when we re-introduce collisions after launch.

It seems to me that people have either forgotten about PGI's promise to replace collisions 'as soon as they are working properly' or have just given up on complaining about it in lieu of ecm/team drops/community warfare/stability issues. Well this just wont do in my opinion as collisions are the #1 thing that I'm currently pissed off about in mwo. So denizens of the mwo forums i ask you to remind PGI that 'after launch' is not an acceptable time to return collisions given that:

1) "after launch" doesn't actually mean anything, especially given PGIs track record with deadlines and promises.

2) Collisions will undoubtedly be broken as **** when they are reintroduced; just like everything else is when PGI adds it to the game and the game no longer being in "beta" will hinder fixing them.

3) Collisions were working fine in closed beta apart from the cosmetic issue of mechs teleporting around during the knockdown/get back up animation. Mechanics wise they were perfectly fine and the game is much worse off without them.

TL;DR - don't let our discontent with the way collisions are being handled get buried/forgotten under the s***storm of other complaints.

bonus rage: the login server went down literally as I finished typing this.

Quote

It wasn't "stupidly broken" or "easily abused". It punished poor piloting. Which is a good thing. The only thing that sucked about it was the minor teleporting that happened when the two mechs would stand up, but thats hardly a big deal considering the myriad bugs we are currently dealing with now. Whatever reason PGI has for not implementing collisions just aren't good reasons at all. This game desperately needs that feeling of immersion and with each and every patch we stray further and further away from that.

Massive case of selective memory.
Collisions were in no way shape or form "working fine" in CB. Teleporting was not just cosmetic, half the time you didn't know which mech you were shooting until it had warped back to a standing position and many team kills resulted from this. On top of that, you had Dragon bowling which could permanently stun lock almost any mech just by walking back and forth over it and anything that collided with an Atlas towards the end of CB resulted in *massive* lag the entire rest of the match.,

Collisions were a buggy broken mechanic that really did need to be gutted and removed. Given how badly implemented they were back then, I'm personally hesitant to see them reintroduced.

Edited by Quxudica, 09 April 2013 - 12:36 PM.

[hammerreborn]

Yokaiko, on 09 April 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

Wrong, this is my join date on my only account. I was invited to the beta literally a day after I applied.

I play at least 2500 games over the course of the closed beta (don't remember exactly with all of the wipes), about 60% of the 3200 games that I have played in open beta.

Again, tell me what I don't remember. Please.

That collisions were stupid as hell? You don't seem to remember that.

Dreamslave, on 09 April 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:

It wasn't "stupidly broken" or "easily abused". It punished poor piloting. Which is a good thing. The only thing that sucked about it was the minor teleporting that happened when the two mechs would stand up, but thats hardly a big deal considering the myriad bugs we are currently dealing with now. Whatever reason PGI has for not implementing collisions just aren't good reasons at all. This game desperately needs that feeling of immersion and with each and every patch we stray further and further away from that.

And it didn't punish poor piloting, it rewarded it. Knocking down enemies was easier and more effective than shooting them...

[Yokaiko]

hammerreborn, on 09 April 2013 - 12:35 PM, said:

And it didn't punish poor piloting, it rewarded it. Knocking down enemies was easier and more effective than shooting them...

Bull.

You didn't get away with that UNLESS you had backup. You aren't shooting them, a jenner (and a lot of the time a dragon) would be on its back with the atlas.

Not where I want to be when both mech stand up, parked in front of a 75 point alpha......so you had backup and the atlas didn't.

You WEREN'T pulling that stunt off alone. Again, nerf tactics.

[Megalosauroid]

Kristov Kerensky, on 09 April 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:

I was around during that time and I wasn't a Founder until AFTER collisions were removed, not all of us BOUGHT our way into the early closed beta...might want to remember that. And an alt account usually has a much later join date then the original account has...another thing to remember. No idea if that's the truth or not in this particular case with Buddahcjcc, but it's something to consider.

Which is why i asked, as opposed to stating that he wasnt around for collisions, but seeing as he hasn't come back it seem that he probably wasnt. If its an alt account then i can only assume his main was banned from the forums(probably for being a ****), in whichcase he can go and be a **** in someone else's thread.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Yokaiko, on 09 April 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

Wrong, this is my join date on my only account. I was invited to the beta literally a day after I applied.

I play at least 2500 games over the course of the closed beta (don't remember exactly with all of the wipes), about 60% of the 3200 games that I have played in open beta.

Again, tell me what I don't remember. Please.

And my join date far preceeds yours and Mega's, as does Buddahcjcc's join date, yet you and Mega are saying he wasn't around that far back? I can see EXACTLY how well your mental processes are working from that, it's no wonder neither of you remember how fubar collisions were.

[Dreamslave]

Quxudica, on 09 April 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:

Massive case of selective memory.
Collisions were in no way shape or form "working fine" in CB. Teleporting was not just cosmetic, half the time you didn't know which mech you were shooting until it had warped back to a standing position and many team kills resulted from this. On top of that, you had Dragon bowling which could permanently stun lock almost any mech just by walking back and forth over it and anything that collided with an Atlas towards the end of CB resulted in *massive* lag the entire rest of the match.,

Collisions were a buggy broken mechanic that really did need to be gutted and removed. Given how badly implemented they were back then, I'm personally hesitant to see them reintroduced.

You obviously have some sort of grudge against the previous incarnation of collisions, given how poorly you are remembering them.

Collisions absolutely need to be one of the biggest priorities in this game, if only because any balancing done at this point will be rendered pointless when collisions are added back in. Balancing needs to happen around collisions, not before and after. It's a waste of time.

[Yokaiko]

Kristov Kerensky, on 09 April 2013 - 12:41 PM, said:

And my join date far preceeds yours and Mega's, as does Buddahcjcc's join date, yet you and Mega are saying he wasn't around that far back? I can see EXACTLY how well your mental processes are working from that, it's no wonder neither of you remember how fubar collisions were.

Missread the year on Budd.

I remember collisions being wonky, I remember when you had to aim a mech and an half in front of a shutdown light to hit it.


....and I can also question your mental process. All of the leg humping and phasing is crap. I LOVE getting stuck in mechs that are busy trying to run through me. Particualy when they are enemies.

Sorry that was too hard for you and your "deep" thoughts.

[hammerreborn]

Yokaiko, on 09 April 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

Bull.

You didn't get away with that UNLESS you had backup. You aren't shooting them, a jenner (and a lot of the time a dragon) would be on its back with the atlas.

Not where I want to be when both mech stand up, parked in front of a 75 point alpha......so you had backup and the atlas didn't.

You WEREN'T pulling that stunt off alone. Again, nerf tactics.

What tactic is there that involves slamming the lightest mech in the game (until the commandos release) into the biggest to eliminate it permanently from combat while you only take a single point of damage. And when you stood up you were never facing each other, so your 75 point alpha (which no one could do in CB in the first place) is more bs than any of my statements.

[Quxudica]

Yokaiko, on 09 April 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

Bull.

You didn't get away with that UNLESS you had backup. You aren't shooting them, a jenner (and a lot of the time a dragon) would be on its back with the atlas.

Not where I want to be when both mech stand up, parked in front of a 75 point alpha......so you had backup and the atlas didn't.

You WEREN'T pulling that stunt off alone. Again, nerf tactics.

There was never any guarantee which mech would be up and moving first or what position they would be warped into, as a result it could easily prove beneficial to a bad pilot.

Regardless, even in a team scenario it still served as a crutch for people with bad aim more then anything else on top of being buggy as hell. Or maybe I'm wrong and it was supposed to be possible for a Jenner to knock over an Atlas? Yeah I'm sure that was working as intended.

Edited by Quxudica, 09 April 2013 - 12:48 PM.

[Yokaiko]

Quxudica, on 09 April 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:

There was never any guarantee which mech would be up and moving first or what position they would be warped into, as a result it could easily prove beneficial to a bad pilot. You really are actively trying to remember only what you want to from it aren't you?

I remember smearing a number of mechs in just those situations. Occasionally someone would catch you from behind, but usually the team would take care of it.

I have NO idea where this falling was an instant death sentence thing. Sometimes it was, sometimes it wasn't, but the game was better, it was harder, and there was more to it then leg hump, and run in circles not matter what the terrain or other mechs in the area were.