378 replies to this topic

[alexivy]

I think the game is suffering from lack of courage within the player base. People ***** about PPCs but honestly, it's no miracle wep. I have a PPC stalker (4PPCs) and my KDR floats around three. I headshot an atlas this morning and he accused me of cheating. I also got humped to death by a commando, mugged by another atlas, and tackled by a centurion. It's not OP is you have the courage to close the distance, and the people who moan about PPCs being OP are the ones who are afraid to do it.

[Ranek Blackstone]

TruePoindexter, on 14 April 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

Accounting for the rotation of both the Earth and Moon in addition to the interaction of gravity between the two would make this a difficult shot.

(Note: obvious facetious comment )

In your head maybe. The geeks at nasa could do it with paper and a pencil (and maybe a slide rule)

[Noobzorz]

cyberFluke, on 14 April 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

Jesus effing christ, you people are ******* stupid.

Randomness *does* add skill. Is Texas Holdem a game of skill, or chance? I'll say this once, and those that understand, will get it. Those that don't, I honestly don't give a rats arse if you get hit by a bus tomorrow.

The skill becomes more than just point and f*cking click, you have to know *when* to shoot, not just point and click, bang. I want to increase the number of factor that have to be taken into account to make that shot, over and over again.

Oh and to the people that just said *I* must be unskilled, as I want to increase the skillcap. My stats are not that bad, I'm no hardcore uber-player, but I don't suck as bad as you do.

It's one thing to offer up this highly dubious proposal, but to defend it like such a baby by screaming and crying like this?

Texas Hold'Em is one of the most insanely high variance tests of "skill" there is. People love it because it's simple and everyone went down chasing millions by joining pokerstars, but there are plenty of instances of total hacks cruising through major tournaments and never winning anything notable ever again. By contrast, think of the number of total hack players who have won a Tennis Grand Slam, or a chess tournament.

Randomness doesn't add skill. Adding more dimensions adds skill.

Your suggestion is insanely moronic, and that's all there is to it. Your ****** little temper tantrum does nothing to change that.

Edited by Noobzorz, 14 April 2013 - 02:06 PM.

[FrostCollar]

Bobzilla, on 14 April 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

Seems like a good idea to me. As long as the cross hair spread is based of a mech's top speed (a ravin at 150 spreads as much as an atlas at 50). Lets face it, you could still aim, if you think you couldn't you need to gain skill.

I'm really not sure where this argument keeps coming from. How does reducing the ability of a player to aim increase skill? It reduces the benefits to be gained from accurate aiming and effectively puts into place a skill ceiling where any ability to aim more accurately than the spread lets you is lost.

It makes all mechs less accurate, long range weapons much less useful, skill less of a factor in deciding engagements, and encourages static gameplay and usage of heavier mechs.

[cyberFluke]

Noobzorz, on 14 April 2013 - 02:05 PM, said:

It's one thing to offer up this highly dubious proposal, but to defend it like such a baby by screaming and crying like this?

Texas Hold'Em is one of the most insanely high variance tests of "skill" there is. People love it because it's simple and everyone went down chasing millions by joining pokerstars, but there are plenty of instances of total hacks cruising through major tournaments and never winning anything notable ever again. By contrast, think of the number of total hack players who have won a Tennis Grand Slam, or a chess tournament.

Randomness doesn't add skill. Adding more dimensions adds skill.

Your suggestion is insanely moronic, and that's all there is to it. Your ****** little temper tantrum does nothing to change that.

Get caught up to date before firing up flames again will you?

[TruePoindexter]

Ranek Blackstone, on 14 April 2013 - 02:01 PM, said:

In your head maybe. The geeks at nasa could do it with paper and a pencil (and maybe a slide rule)

Well If I could fit some of them into my cockpit with me I'm sure I wouldn't miss either

[Elkarlo]

Ranek Blackstone, on 14 April 2013 - 01:40 PM, said:

PPCs and lasers are energy weapons and generate no recoil. How would the aim be shifted off target?

Ballistics weapons use hydraulic systems to absorb the recoil to the point the mech's own mass would be able to take the recoil force with out flinching. This is why tank cannons lurch back into the turret rather violently, but the tank barely shifts when doing so. Besides, if my guns are on different parts of the mech, how does the recoil from my left arm disrupt the aim of my right?

Other problems with adding accuracy penalties to movement is computer controlled gyro stabilized weapons systems, like the kind found on modern tanks. These let the tank travel 40+ kph over broken ground and still retain a 90%+ first shot hit ratio at over 500m. And since the only motion in the mech is the up down movement from the stride, the system has to work with fewer variables then the system in a tank.

Heat doesn't make any sense to me at all. All it would do is have the pilot get sweat in his eyes, which would suck, but you can just climate control the inside of the helmet to keep your head cold.

Heat makes lot of Sense, do you know how much Heat influences Lasers, Ballistics Weapons, modern Tanks needs to be Calibrated for the Weather and Climate, or he won't hit anything. Same goes for Lasers. And this Weapons are not nice easy "Modern" Ballistics. This are big barrel heavy Ordenance firing Weapons. For instance a Modern MBT fires something around a AC2 at best. ( 1,2 Tons Barrel 3,9 Tons Mountings) Now you have to koordinate all Weapons spread over a 3 MEters and hit the same target 300 Meters away... it is not possible, you will hit a Target with both 3 Meters wide, but you won't hit it in the same 20x20cm square and thats whats happening atm.

And this is the biggest Problem, you can hit with 6 PPC which weight together 42 Tons, located in 6 Different Locations a Target big as 20x20cm in a single Volley, and that is simply impossible. So SOME spread when firing a Alpha Strike would reduce some effects we have here.

[Ranek Blackstone]

cyberFluke, on 14 April 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

Get caught up to date before firing up flames again will you?

Not sure what there is to get up to date on. Dealer gives you a bunch of cards from a deck of 52. Unless you can bluff your way to a win, your odds of winning are based entirely on "luck of the draw."

[Inconspicuous]

Noobzorz, on 14 April 2013 - 02:05 PM, said:

Randomness doesn't add skill. Adding more dimensions adds skill.

Agreed, however I think some people would be more happy with this:


I prefer to hit where I am aiming...

[Targetloc]

TruePoindexter, on 14 April 2013 - 01:46 PM, said:

Isn't this a failing though on the enemy for not understanding their own positioning? You can't consider skill in game play without looking at it from both the player's and the enemy's perspective. In this scenario would reducing precision fire truly enhance your opponents play or would it just lead to them getting slaughtered later? I would argue that novices are in fact - novices. Remove the sniper weapons from a shooter like CS and you simply have players dying slightly later in medium/close combat because they in fact weren't good players to begin with.

On second thought, you're right. They mainly died because they failed to box their target in and force a true 2v1.

It's still my gut feeling that it's too easy to make donuts out of mechs, and at the higher levels they drop in seconds rather than lurching along as ravaged, one-armed terminators like you'd expect from a mech game.

Torso twisting, proper use of terrain and free-look can drastically increase your survivability, but keen players know to wait for a clean shot. And with a couple of keen snipers (or dual AC20 Cats) you can drop a mech before they even know what hit them. And we don't even have clan weapons yet.

[Noobzorz]

cyberFluke, on 14 April 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

Get caught up to date before firing up flames again will you?

So far all evidence points to you being a overly-sensitive douchebag. I mean, just looking at your posts suggests you're a very, very angry dude, and the attention you've paid to this topic tells me you're really invested in your ideas and respond badly to criticism. All the information in between the (****ty) post I quoted and now corroborate this.

Anyway, what you should be proposing is some mechanism of making aiming difficult without making aiming random. The particular suggestion in your OP is a manifestly bad way to accomplish this, since it actually homogenizes players instead of stratifying them, and it takes away from the players option set. It's got "I didn't think about this for very long" writ large all over it in exclusively capital letters. I'm not sure how you'd fix this while extending the player more choices, since I am also not overly fond of 6 PPC stalkers, but your idea is not the way, regardless of the specifics of how it is implemented.

[Lukoi Banacek]

cyberFluke, on 14 April 2013 - 02:21 AM, said:

I want an honest, sensible discussion about this and how it could help move MW:O on from where it is, to where it should be. Please?

Tank reticles don't expand based on movement or speed. Nor do aircraft.....these machines we pilot are closer akin to those things than the people running and gunning in a first person shooter.

I vote no to expanding reticles based on movement.

[Marcus Cvellus]

OP, your idea isn't really good because it forgets that lights operate at extreme speed.
That would remove their already shaken (read nearly removed) viability.
When i think about it, it will, anyway, get completely removed if forums get their way anyhow.

Reading most of the comments, i realize it really doesn't matter anymore.
People want easymode for heavy brawl and quick matches.

Wishlist goes like this: Great(er) armor, insane one shot (maybe even 360 noscope soon) kills, no weak spots and special form of immunity to lights.

Considering "aiming=skil, get any and build a ppc boat" comments, i dont say anything about that. It is a skill, but if it is paired with builds that instashot/twoshot almost everything it tends to be OP/gamebreaking/cheese/.
It is not about skill anymore. or size of epeen, but about fun (and other people getting it, remember, you are not playing against bots), balance and longevity of this game that depends on amount of fun it can provide to A LOT of people, not selected few.

Edited by Marcus Cvellus, 14 April 2013 - 02:25 PM.

[Vassago Rain]

cyberFluke, on 14 April 2013 - 11:33 AM, said:

What we're trying to simulate here is the fact that there is no way in hell all those weapons should be pinpoint accurate to the same damn pinpoint, every time, no matter what the f**k the mech is doing. This behavior is broken. It doesn't add any skill, FPS games of the effing nineties figured that out in a hurry for f**ks sakes.

But they didn't, and the ones people take seriously all use math or actual accuracy. Quake 3, for instance. You hit where you aim. Even counter-strike has the exact same spray pattern every single time you spray.

You're saying you want MWO to be more like call of duty, and Mario kart, essentially.

[Bagheera]

Noob Weapons, on 14 April 2013 - 02:27 AM, said:

So until I would even consider this approach, I want to know what light mechs get out of this system?

I reckon the rabbit gets ******.

Proper ******.

System like described utterly destroys light mechs and most mediums as well. No bueno.

[Malora Sidewinder]

Just putting it out there: Even in my dragon, I don't regularly get killed by 6 PPC stalkers/splat cats/jump snipes.

I usually die because I'm not paying attention and wander by myself into the enemy en masse, or i get out piloted. (This is ignoring things like having 7 quadriplegia patients on your team and chance bad luck ammo explosions, can't fix that.)

In other words, let me rephrase this.
It's *not* the 6 ppc stalkers. It's *YOU.*

You are not good enough of a pilot, not skilled enough, to overcome mechs with overwhelming mid-range only firepower that literally get a single alpha before they overheat.

It's not them, and they don't need nerfing. the crosshair thing is just about the stupidest idea i've seen in 6 months in terms of this game. Seriously, increasing crosshair size with HEAT? This is *not* call of duty. Please don't try to make it such.

as is, the gameplay is pretty multifaceted. every single mech has at least one variant that's doable. you can do whatever you want (but if you want to boat a skill-less weapon like LRMs you'll be punished and rightfully taken out by more skillful players)

What you are trying to do is rebalance the game to suit *you* at the expense of everyone who is *not you.* and that's foolish at best.

[Lukoi Banacek]

The funny part is, Cyberfluke thinks those weapons always hit in the same places over and over. If you hit a seam, some go on one side, some the other (testing grounds can confirm this on a "boated" Mech).

There are so many variables to hitting the same locales...you're movement, the enemy's movement, torso twist etc. Yet you feel the game needs more variables and in fact, variables that the player cannot control.

Still vote no

[Vassago Rain]

Lukoi, on 14 April 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:

The funny part is, Cyberfluke thinks those weapons always hit in the same places over and over. If you hit a seam, some go on one side, some the other (testing grounds can confirm this on a "boated" Mech).

There are so many variables to hitting the same locales...you're movement, the enemy's movement, torso twist etc. Yet you feel the game needs more variables and in fact, variables that the player cannot control.

Still vote no

He's a classic scrublord. I've dealt with them for as long as I can remember. They should stick to games that cater to them, like Mario kart, where there's a skill ceiling, so people who are 'too good' can't use their skills to win, and even the worst player can RNG his way to a blue shell and 'win.'

[Ravenspyre]

cyberFluke, on 14 April 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

[Redacted]

Randomness *does* add skill. Is Texas Holdem a game of skill, or chance? I'll say this once, and those that understand, will get it. Those that don't, I honestly don't give a rats arse if you get hit by a bus tomorrow.

The skill becomes more than just point and f*cking click, you have to know *when* to shoot, not just point and click, bang. I want to increase the number of factor that have to be taken into account to make that shot, over and over again.

Oh and to the people that just said *I* must be unskilled, as I want to increase the skillcap. My stats are not that bad, I'm no hardcore uber-player, but I don't suck as bad as you do.

If you believe the current system is all about "skill" then you are deluded as anyone who wants randomness thrown in.

Edited by Egomane, 15 April 2013 - 12:54 AM.
Quote clean-up

[Noobzorz]

Malora Sidewinder, on 14 April 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

Just putting it out there: Even in my dragon, I don't regularly get killed by 6 PPC stalkers/splat cats/jump snipes.

I usually die because I'm not paying attention and wander by myself into the enemy en masse, or i get out piloted. (This is ignoring things like having 7 quadriplegia patients on your team and chance bad luck ammo explosions, can't fix that.)

In other words, let me rephrase this.
It's *not* the 6 ppc stalkers. It's *YOU.*

You are not good enough of a pilot, not skilled enough, to overcome mechs with overwhelming mid-range only firepower that literally get a single alpha before they overheat.

It's not them, and they don't need nerfing. the crosshair thing is just about the stupidest idea i've seen in 6 months in terms of this game. Seriously, increasing crosshair size with HEAT? This is *not* call of duty. Please don't try to make it such.

as is, the gameplay is pretty multifaceted. every single mech has at least one variant that's doable. you can do whatever you want (but if you want to boat a skill-less weapon like LRMs you'll be punished and rightfully taken out by more skillful players)

What you are trying to do is rebalance the game to suit *you* at the expense of everyone who is *not you.* and that's foolish at best.

I definitely think the OPs suggestion is ridiculous, and his "defences" of it seem like desperate efforts to earn the insults everyone is throwing at him, but I would be remiss if I didn't say that I definitely think that 6 PPC stalkers are kind of over the top. I find the Dragon, paradoxically, to be one of the mechs that is better at not getting killed by 6 PPC stalkers, since its fast and maneuverable, and you have to lead targets by a healthy margin to nail them with PPCs when they're fast movers. Instead, when I get spanked by a stalker with a jillion PPCs its in something bigger and heavier where you cannot escape and pinging you with it is easy.