283 replies to this topic

[Dirus Nigh]

BlueSanta, on 19 April 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:

It is AMAZING that you still care so little about voice comms, a STAPLE of multiplayer games, and prefer to say the new player experience sucks because they don't have third person. Seriously, I just have no idea how that is your logical thought process.

I guess Valve had no idea what they were doing with Counter-Strike...10 years ago.

Battlefield 2 to this day has had the best voice system I have ever used in a game. One of the biggest disappointments I've had with the Battlefield IP was when BF3 did not have voice. And a commander role or command assets but thats a different topic. Which PGI should rip off of shamelessly for the voice and command console functionality.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 19 April 2013 - 06:37 PM, said:

I am really surprised people aren't more peeved by the voice com answer.

Considering for the 6 months or so I've been playing, EVERY and I mean EVERY time a PUG vs. Premade argument comes up. All the premades do is say "GET VOICE, GET VOICE, GET VOICE".

One of the most contentious topics in the closed beta forums was integrated voice coms. A very vocal population against MWO having integrated voice coms were players who used TS3.

Their stated reasoning was fear of the hypothetical 12 year old racist misogynist and how they will be meany heads. They deliberately ignored reasonable suggestions like being able to mute an individual player, report function for problem players, or the ability to turn the whole thing off if TS3 was preferred. They were full of crap.

What they really wanted was to deny pug groups voice coms so they could had an advantage over them.

I am still adamant in my believe that integrated voice coms would only serve to strengthen the MWO community. However I gave up arguing for it when it became clear that the MWO community dropped the issue like yesterdays news, and PGI never really seemed all that interested in having it. I want to be wrong about that. It just feels like that ship has sailed.

So I looked up a group, The Lone Wolves, and have been playing with them. I still pug frequently and the need for integrated voice coms is even more glaringly obvious.

[Dalorante Corbanis]

STOP full map ER PPC Gauss, PLEASE

[Deathlike]

Alright.. I have only one more of these posts in me before I start caring a lost less.. as MWO Support sucks at handing obvious bug reports and I will post how incompetent this support person is... who cannot seem to READ and EXAMINE what I have to say.

PGI, when you discuss or talk about BALANCE, I would like to think you sound intelligent and have valid reasons for why you did or did not make changes to certain things... which include ECM, MGs, and other stuff. There's nothing wrong with defending your position on such things since there are aspects are not apparently obvious to everyone and that's fine.

HOWEVER, if you are to make such comments as "working as intended", you MUST explain point by point WHY you think it is working. What are you actually addressing? Why do you think it is "working as intended"? What do you think are the "most repeated thread" from all the people who disagree AND EXPLAIN WHY they may or may not be correct? It is NOT A BAD THING to admit there are issues. If you cannot defend your position on the topic at hand, THEN YOU HAVE A FAULTY POSITION IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Here's an example:

We have discuss MGs in the balance thread and how they need buffing. Now, first of all... we need to determine if they need a buff. There are plenty of videos buried in the MG threads, showing how they are so INEFFECTIVE AT SHOOTING NON-MOVING TARGETS. We make comparisons to the Small Lasers for various reasons. I don't think Small Lasers are being complained about in the focus. In fact, the most whining is about the current meta-game, which is lots of ranged sniping. So... small lasers are probably NOT AN ISSUE.

When people make suggestions to BALANCE the MG vs the small laser, this is NOT NECESSARILY A BAD THING. It takes a LOT MORE EFFORT TO USE THE MGS, considering MGs have various things working against them, such as RATE OF FIRE (ROF) and CONE OF FIRE (bullet spread) AND CONSTANT EXPOSURE (streaming bullets) that require the MG user to lay on their target. They are already limited to distance (90m optimal) AND how you must use them. To say they are "working as intended" is an understatement. The fact is, making them do crits provide a VERY WEAK VALUE to a weapon that DOES NOT HURT ANY MECH MORE OFTEN THAN NOT due to limitations you put on the mech.

So, if you THINK they are balanced, why don't you use a Spider-5K with 4 MGs + energy weapon of your choice? Please tell me how effective this is in the current game? Please CITE EXAMPLES of success. If this is not the optimal choice of weaponry of a Spider-5K, WHAT DO YOU THINK ARE FAIR COMPARABLE EXAMPLES of a good Spider-5k build? We personally would like to know how effective these builds are.

See, you guys hold the cards... you collect all the data at hand. So, what are the statistics for the common Spider-5k pilot? It's probably fair to assume their k-d ratio is not so hot, so how about their win-loss ratio? What is the damage that they do on average? How often are Spider-5Ks are used? What is the win-loss ratio compared to something like the Spider-5V or even the Spider-5D? How do we know that Spider-5K pilots are faring OK with the current state of the game? This has to be explained to me. What is the current usage of the Spider-5K for most players? Are they just a "stepping stone" to eliting/mastering the Spider-5K or are they used in tandem like all the other non-ECM lights?

If the Spider-5K is "fine", but perhaps we should be waiting for a future addition to the game to "rebuild" our opinion of the current variant? Is it a Light AC2 of some sort? What is planned to make the Spider-5K useful in the forseeable future? If you are to propose "MGs are fine", then what are the CURRENT ALTERNATIVES, if not what are the FUTURE ALTERNATIVES that you are looking forward to add to make the Spider-5K a viable mech? You cannot just tell me that options AS IS is working as they should be.

Feel free to get comments from your own internal testers. I wish I hear how the Spider-5K is "working for them". Are they consistently successful in the current enviornment? Is the mech used often enough in regular play, or for fun? Is it effective enough to be recommended over a different Spider variant? These things are useful to learn from and understand. This is the kind of thing that people wish to know.. instead of a blanket answer of "working as intended".

Here's a more "controversial example"... ECM.

If you believe ECM is "working the way you believe it should", explain how and why? Please state why in full detail.

How is locking out an entire class of locking weapons (LRMs and Streak SRMs) fair? Is TAG sufficient for use vs a light mech? I am aware that they are fairly viable against ECM Atlases. How often does PGI use ECM? How often do they carry TAG and LRMs? How effective is TAG and LRMs with respect to the current state of missiles? Is NARC actually being used in serious play (outside of trial mechs)? Is detection @ 200m for targets under the ECM cloak fair? Why is there a very limited range? You only have 20m to work with respect to streaks. Do you think BAP or Advanced Sensor Range is a sufficient counter to ECM? A 50m range increase is still not viable, considering most light mechs have the speed to "close the gap" or "avoid the gap altogether".

Is the ECM light mech part of the future CW meta-game? Is it intended to make other non-ECM light variants (outside of the Jenner) less valuable? If is not an intended consequence to make the non-ECM variants (outside of the Jenners) effective, then can you show some numbers disputing that claim? How often does PGI use non-ECM/non-Jenner variants? Are there non-ECM light mech/non-Jenners builds effective enough to counter the ECM-capable lights? If it is intended to make ECM lights the future meta-game, please explain why.

What is the reasoning behind letting ECM being "stackable" in terms of coverage and protection? Why is it not a viable solution to allow ALL ECM to be countered by another mech? For instance, if there are two light ECM mechs, AND you personally bring PPCs and Streaks to the match, why should firing at one ECM light mech stand to benefit from the other ECM light mech's protection? It is possible to bring PPCs and Streaks to various mechs (including the Jenner or Raven, not that it is optimal), but in what instance is this "fair" or "unfair". It would be appreciated to have an explanation to this behavior.

Mind you, I don't care for all this ECM lore and whatnot... I care A LOT MORE how ECM effects the overall gameplay. I CARE to see something as non-viable as the Spider-5K become useful, despite not having much consideration to master it (especially due to the current situation). I would like to see more variety, but also more balance to this game. The fact that there are no "reasonably well thought out explanations" makes me think otherwise. If you want people to take your comments for what they are worth, then you MUST ATTEMPT to EXPLAIN IN FULL DETAIL, what you think is working and what you think is not working. Otherwise, you are not being honest or at the very least, have not considered any sort of self-reflection to see the errors in your ways. When I've seen older games that have had lots of complaining going on, especially after a major change... you can at least understand the logic that went into it, even if the majority disagree. It doesn't mean that there wasn't a problem to be addressed, but it also doesn't mean that all changes are good. You have to strike a BALANCE as to what is good and what is not. The fact is, when you cannot commit to an question that truly needs more time and thought, you probably are not passionate enough to defend your points, as you have claimed.

For those TL;DR, I will say that the terrible answers get you more disgruntled players. If you state your case, and make an attempt to show that you are listening and reading what we write, then we won't be apprehensive as we now in the current state of the game. There is no faith in a provider that doesn't understand what he/she is providing to the masses. That is a bad sign and I would hope you work to correct this. Ask the Devs is supposed to be a floating mound of info that we didn't know about, not about statements that do not clarify or even attempt to defuse the situation. WE WANT GOOD AND WELL THOUGHT OUT ANSWERS. Not one word answers like "yes" and "no".

Others may feel free to copy and paste questions proposed in this thread, to future "Ask the Devs" post. I'm sure this will come up again in some way shape or form.

[Kmieciu]

In my opinion PGI needs to analyse the weapons using scientific methods, like they did with ELO and Matchmaking.
I'm hoping someone like Omid Kiarostami is going to take the cumulative weapon stats and say: those weapons are underused, they deal the least damage per tonne / per match, and will convince other designers to make them more effective.

[anonymous161]

*sigh* each time I read their thoughts I just cant stand this game much longer. They basically just ignore everything we say and make some worthless comment that never answers our questions and concerns. Frankly considering we are the ones funding them mainly and how many of us spend quite a bit more money on a ftp game than a 60 dollar game and how little we have gotten I honestly think everyone should simply stop funding them, and stop giving them suggestions.

At this point I know this game wont last much longer for me, I've never been this disappointed in a team before, I dont remember the last time I played a mechwarrior game and said how broken and un fun it is, but this game gets that score.

These devs obviously just not able to do the job right. We will always have a broken game as far as I'm concerned. At this point considering they will never be able to make good on their promise, if you remember they said if this was successful would make a stand alone single player game, I dont think this will ever happen and I rather just be told it's not happening. Lets just let this failure of a mechwarrior game crash and burn and hopefully someone else with a better team can get us results and quality garaunteed without this bull sh*t from these so called professional game developers.

This game simply sucks compared to any of the old games. It can be fun but it's broken so often I just about to give up on it. I wont be spending anymore money on it ever again.

[anonymous161]

Treckin, on 20 April 2013 - 09:19 PM, said:

I like how this ATD only has 6 pages of responses. Its a ghost town. I keep checking back in hoping that the production house pulls the plug on the dev team, but no dice.

PGI has shown me the other side of the f2p coin - when a crummy studio owns IP you love, they get to directly suckle the teet of the players until there are none left. As opposed to dealing with pissed investors who want money or blood.

These clowns just have to stoke the flames in their forums to put coin in their pockets.

Which is why I think we should all agree to simply stop funding them, stop trying to help them. They have proven they dont care about us, what we see about the game. This is just fun time for them. They are not up to the task of making this game complete. I dont see this lasting another year. Each time we get this stupid ATD more and more of us like me are getting pissed off with their attitude and lack of understanding. They simply give yes or no, or maybe answers but not detailed ones that we deserve.

This game simply needs to cease to be. Let someone more competent and smarter do the series justice. They had their chance now I believe it's time another developer who has a better history of making quality games and who has respect for the players who make it possible for them to release a game for them to be proud of.

I am about done with this game it's not all that much fun anymore. When I saw the trailer first time I was awed at what I saw, but what do we have? A mediocre mech game that doesn't let you do anything.

Also no core explosions????? WTF!??? How is this a mechwarrior without explosions what mech game in resent years have not had a fusion reactor explosion? Are they really this lazy and stupid?

Yup

[anonymous161]

ArmageddonKnight, on 20 April 2013 - 05:51 AM, said:

aww none of my 4 questions were answered

Owell was my 1st time positng in the Questions thread so guess ill try agian next time.

Dude dont expect your questions to ever be answered. They pretty much while their thumb is up their *** and their bosses type with their nose simple answers like *No* *sure* *maybe* or most of all *I DONT CARE*

[Vassago Rain]

Dirus Nigh, on 20 April 2013 - 10:52 PM, said:

Battlefield 2 to this day has had the best voice system I have ever used in a game. One of the biggest disappointments I've had with the Battlefield IP was when BF3 did not have voice. And a commander role or command assets but thats a different topic. Which PGI should rip off of shamelessly for the voice and command console functionality.



One of the most contentious topics in the closed beta forums was integrated voice coms. A very vocal population against MWO having integrated voice coms were players who used TS3.

Their stated reasoning was fear of the hypothetical 12 year old racist misogynist and how they will be meany heads. They deliberately ignored reasonable suggestions like being able to mute an individual player, report function for problem players, or the ability to turn the whole thing off if TS3 was preferred. They were full of crap.

What they really wanted was to deny pug groups voice coms so they could had an advantage over them.

I am still adamant in my believe that integrated voice coms would only serve to strengthen the MWO community. However I gave up arguing for it when it became clear that the MWO community dropped the issue like yesterdays news, and PGI never really seemed all that interested in having it. I want to be wrong about that. It just feels like that ship has sailed.

So I looked up a group, The Lone Wolves, and have been playing with them. I still pug frequently and the need for integrated voice coms is even more glaringly obvious.

The system of which you speak was pioneered in action quake, and became an industry standard with counter-strike.

FOLLOW ME. GO GO GO! NEGATIVE. STICK TOGETHER, TEAM!

They have stated they're working on adding simple voice commands like this, but it's kinda silly they didn't have them right from the start.

[Treckin]

Well I reinstalled windows 3 weeks ago and didnt reinstall MWO.

I dont know how many more are like me, but based on the lack of responses, I am going to bet many many people have jumped from this burning wreck of a game.

If they werent so busy rationalizing ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY, they could crunch some telemetry on their userbase and see how badly they effed this up.

[Tesunie]

Tesunie: Are we to expect any kind of special ammo for weapon systems? In particular, I'm asking about Thunder LRM ammo. I think it'd be nice to predict enemy movements and blind fire these Thunder LRMs to set up a quick mine field on the ground.
A: No ETA.



I'm famous now! My question was answered!

I do hope and read no ETA to mean it is being considered or even worked on as low priority project at this moment with no release date. It's better than being told that they might think on it... I think.

I wouldn't mind LRMs having more functionality with less overall damage. Feel the functionality would be as nice as damage can be. Though mines as a consumable item would deter me from using them, especially if they remain as equal opportunity killers (aka will explode on anyone who steps on them, friend or foe). If they are consumable (unless really cheap) I expect them to have a ff identifier on them.


And who thinks the Stalker has small side torsos!? Stalkers are walking side torso with legs... I tend to make their sides go pop easy enough right now as it is...

[Arcaist]

Darth Bane001, on 21 April 2013 - 04:22 AM, said:

*sigh* each time I read their thoughts I just cant stand this game much longer. They basically just ignore everything we say and make some worthless comment that never answers our questions and concerns. Frankly considering we are the ones funding them mainly and how many of us spend quite a bit more money on a ftp game than a 60 dollar game and how little we have gotten I honestly think everyone should simply stop funding them, and stop giving them suggestions.

At this point I know this game wont last much longer for me, I've never been this disappointed in a team before, I dont remember the last time I played a mechwarrior game and said how broken and un fun it is, but this game gets that score.

These devs obviously just not able to do the job right. We will always have a broken game as far as I'm concerned. At this point considering they will never be able to make good on their promise, if you remember they said if this was successful would make a stand alone single player game, I dont think this will ever happen and I rather just be told it's not happening. Lets just let this failure of a mechwarrior game crash and burn and hopefully someone else with a better team can get us results and quality garaunteed without this bull sh*t from these so called professional game developers.

This game simply sucks compared to any of the old games. It can be fun but it's broken so often I just about to give up on it. I wont be spending anymore money on it ever again.

Well, simple solution: Quit playing it and leave.

[ICEFANG13]

Arcaist, on 21 April 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

Well, simple solution: Quit playing it and leave.

I wonder if many people have done that.

Sometimes people still stick around because they have hope the game will get better, in a game system, or lore way, is extremely appealing to them. Take me, I love the idea of the game, and I know nothing about mech warrior, nothing, I had a lot of fun in closed beta, but I honestly think that almost every pure balance aspect they release is worse and worse (there are a few good ones I'm sure, I'm unable to think of any right now).

I really want the game to succeed, and I disagree heavily with what PGI seems to think every patch (fear the 6 MG Spider, brother of the 3 second Jenner). I try to provide feedback, but based on what they think and do, its like they ignore us or don't care what the forums have to say.

You can tell me that we are the minority, but where do they get the info from? Facebook posts?

LRMs really OP! FIX FIX!

Damn that convinced me, I could see why they would follow that.

Forum posts are generally argumentative, and well thought out. Its foolish to say that the game is perfect, no game is perfect, its striving for the perfection that every game tries to do. I'm trying to help.

[Krzysztof z Bagien]

And that leads to another thought: why they even bothered with creating forums and official game website, if they don't announce anything here and don't take any feedback from forum users?

[Treckin]

The lack of responses to this thread are testament to the way that PGI has shunned most of the useful feedback on their forums. The only people left are true diehard MW fans, older people who don't play any other titles anyway (in fact may have purchased their computer specifically and only for MWO), and new players 5 games from quitting.

But hey, here's to their graphical representation of World of Warcraft's Reputation system - the hotly anticipated Community Warfare content.

Its pretty transparent even at this point: We will all have to grind reputation exp for the various clan houses to buy clan weapons, and there will be MC boosts to Reputation.

Thats whats coming guys. Don't think for a second its going to be fun - because PGI has shown repetitively how completely surreal and out of touch their concept of "fun" is.

Edited by Treckin, 21 April 2013 - 10:55 AM.

[Rebas Kradd]

Treckin, on 21 April 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:

Thats whats coming guys. Don't think for a second its going to be fun - because PGI has shown repetitively how completely surreal and out of touch their concept of "fun" is.

You've posted the exact same material three times in 15 posts. Do you just want attention/validation or something?

You have zero evidence that this game is dying. Activity on ATD threads does not count. I am amazed at how many people gripe about what is essentially a niche weapon (MG), or how few understand how balanced the game actually is (very), or call the devs swindlers because they don't write two paragraphs for every single question posed in ATD. I for one would like them to STAY off the forums and spend their time writing new code.

[Bagheera]

Vassago Rain, on 21 April 2013 - 06:11 AM, said:

The system of which you speak was pioneered in action quake, and became an industry standard with counter-strike.

FOLLOW ME. GO GO GO! NEGATIVE. STICK TOGETHER, TEAM!

They have stated they're working on adding simple voice commands like this, but it's kinda silly they didn't have them right from the start.

I would have settled for the simplistic chat macro system from Planetside 1. I cannot tell you the number of times I wanted a "Cease Fire!" macro for the beginning of matches when someone is "weapons testing" into my armor.

Still, Dirus is 100% correct. In client voice-comms were heavily debated in closed beta, with most of the strongest voices against them being the "PUGs with microphones" populating the community TS3 servers who would couldn't handle the game on a level playing field. The same folks who could play 8-mans, but prefer to play 4-mans so they can be matched against teams without voice comms.

[Treckin]

Rebas Kradd, on 21 April 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

how balanced the game actually is (very), or call the devs swindlers because they don't write two paragraphs for every single question posed in ATD. I for one would like them to STAY off the forums and spend their time writing new code.

I have a very balanced tree branch to show you. How long will you play with it before you admit that balance =/= fun?

I never said the devs were swindlers, I said they are self-evidently incompetent.

I also never said they should post more. I said their idea for CW is lazy and unimaginative - mirroring the Reputation systems found in 10 year old MMOs. And it wasn't fun 10 years ago.

Edited by Treckin, 21 April 2013 - 11:50 AM.

[Damocles]

Bryan Ekman, on 19 April 2013 - 02:59 PM, said:

Damocles: Will you be adding new vision modes? Example: MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detector) and what is the ETA on vision modes being displayed on the cockpit glass?
A: No ETA on either. They have been designed and will be worked on at some future date.

First, thanks for answering my softball question.
Second; you have these things designed, announced and aren't even working on them.

OK

[Deathlike]

Rebas Kradd, on 21 April 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

You have zero evidence that this game is dying. Activity on ATD threads does not count. I am amazed at how many people gripe about what is essentially a niche weapon (MG), or how few understand how balanced the game actually is (very), or call the devs swindlers because they don't write two paragraphs for every single question posed in ATD. I for one would like them to STAY off the forums and spend their time writing new code.

Have you ever seen the 4MG Spider-5K in action? If so, have you actually been threatened by the MG usage? Answer that, and you will understand why these comments are made.

ICEFANG13, on 21 April 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

I really want the game to succeed, and I disagree heavily with what PGI seems to think every patch (fear the 6 MG Spider, brother of the 3 second Jenner). I try to provide feedback, but based on what they think and do, its like they ignore us or don't care what the forums have to say.

I've heard about the 3 second Jenner. I would actually like to know what that build is and why was it a threat? Was it simply not counterable? Could you not leg this Jenner effectively? Was this "3 Second Jenner" a threat to the true 2.0 DHS system altogether?

It's OK to explain the details of such a thing w/o diving into specifics, but you have to give a small essay on what was happening that made it so OP. Internal videos or at least some decent number crunching would be helpful to unstand this.. instead of "inventing the boogeyman", which some have decided to coin the "3 Second Jenner" as.

[ICEFANG13]

I was joking, there is no 3 second Jenner that is a realistic threat. You can't pack enough weapons to core an Atlas, even one with no back armor, in 3 seconds, even 6 Medium Pulse Lasers, that can kill all mechs in .75 seconds, but it carries no extra DHS anyway.