Jump to content

Ask The Devs 38 - Answered!


124 replies to this topic

#1 Bryan Ekman

    Creative Director

  • Developer
  • Developer
  • 1,106 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationVancouver, BC

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:00 PM

Ask the Devs #38

Just a note, I did not answer any Clan specific questions this time around, as we are focused on discussing the current live version, UI 2.0, and Community Warfare.

UI 2.0

Maverick01: Would you consider adding Mech Biographies to the Mechlab for UI 2.0? Basically, the Mech Bio would give a description of the BattleMech, along with history, role, and capabilities. The Mech Bio would also show the lore behind Hero Mechs. This would be a great addition for new players and veterans alike!
A: Yes, we plan to add a lot more descriptive lore about each BattleMech and Item in the game.

Harmin: Could we be able to export and import mech loadout configurations as say XML files?A: Probably not due to the complexity of how a transaction needs to be handled between client and server. I’ll check though.

WardenWolf : In the recent announcements about UI 2.0, the following was stated: "Supports standard game resolutions 1024x768 to 1920x1200." Is there any reason you are only supporting up to 1920x1200? What is expected / planned to happen when trying to run full-screen at higher resolutions, like 2560x1440 or 2560x1600?
A: The UI is being built to support any valid resolution from 1024x768 upwards.

mekabuser: Is special attention being paid to the paint and cammo screen in UI2? Features like zoom and rotate?
A: Yes.

EJT: UI 2.0 looks great. Do you plan to make the filter settings persistent from session to session so players don't have to click a dozen things to display only their desired content every time they start the game?
A: Ideally yes. I’ll have to see if it’s doable.

Big Giant Head: Some sounds and maybe some animations and different camera angles in mechlab with UI 2.0 would be perfect. Have you considered any?
A: Definitely. We’re still working out the exact details.

Gnadelwarz: Will there be a function in UI 2.0 to save Serveral Loadouts for the Same Chasis? Like 1 Brawler Loadout, 1 Sniper, 1 LRM Load Out for a Heavy Metal. So you can change loadouts quickly with 1-2 clicks.
A: This is under review and being decided on currently.

Community Warfare/Clans

Seth: I understand that units who want to form their own MWO teams and control planets will be able to form a Merc Corp to do so. Would all people who align to one of the Successor States be lumped together in one giant team? Is there going to be someway for people to form a House team recognized by MWO or will they have to rely on their own private websites to form a cohesive team?
A: Merc Corps can align themselves with Factions. We’re exploring ways for players to create Faction Units that would work similar to a Merc Corp, but have a permanent affiliation to a specific House or Clan.

Multitallented: Regarding community warfare, how are matches between mercenaries going to be scheduled? Will there be a penalty for not responding to attacks in a reasonable time? Please describe the process of one mercenary attacking another.
A: I’m going to hold off answering this in great detail, as we plan to release this info before launch in a detailed CC post. The short answer - the penalty would be loss of the undefended planet. Matches will be scheduled during (regional) primetime periods.

Razgriz Gundam: How will the relationship between the Lyran Commonwealth, and the Federated Suns work in community warfare?
A: They will be allied for now.

MegaZordTrololo: From the sounds of it, community warfare will need the matchmaker to generate teams of players all from a single faction to start a match. Have you considered the effects on waiting times for matchmaking that this will cause? Especially considering that the future player base may be split into 1st person and 3rd person queues.
A: Yes, we do not anticipate an increase in wait times due to Lone Wolf and aligned solo Merc Unit players filling the ranks.

`Mech's and Mechbay

Asmudius Heng: Mechs are being given 'quirks' to change their handling capabilities to differentiate hero mechs and variants. Have you considered adding different quirks to all mechs to give them more flavour linked to their lore.? E.G. Awesome might get slightly better heat dissipation for PPCs, Stalker slightly better LRM reloads, Jager more ammo per ton for ballistics? Something to help differentiate mechs with minor tweaks and quirks.
A: Right now we are limited to modifying the data associated with how a Mech functions. Ie) Torso Yaw Speed. Eventually, with some engineering support we could look at additional quirks.

Adridos: What is the team's stance on the issue of "entry requirements" being raised?
Currently, for a mech to be usable, it needs to get upgraded by DHS, ES and have all it's efficiences skilled up, otherwise it is gimping itself in the match. There are already mentions of expanded pilot trees, epics and such and it may very well become a serious issue. Thus I would like to know the official stance on this.
A: This is entirely subjective. It depends at which level you play at. From my 1 in hundreds of thousands of player view, I can roll into a match with a stock Mech and be very competitive, and get lots of enjoyment. I may not be able to compete for 1st place all the time, but I can usually place in the top 8 no sweat. Your skill and Elo rating will definitely drive the level of competitive play you will face, and therefore the requirement to bring a more efficient, upgraded `Mech to the match. This is working as intended, and plays nicely in with how a player’s skill and inventory evolve over time.

N0V0CAIN: Will the Atlas D-DC's command console allow a 9th or 13th person to enter a match and take command in a match as a passenger?
A: No plans to do so. We’re looking at a more passive benefit, rather than a literal to the TT rules.

Miles Naismith: There are a number of mechs that are available by canon but don't have enough variants to master. Any chance we can get some C-Bill buyable custom variants to flesh them out?
A: Right now we have so many BattleMechs to choose from with plenty of variants. Once we exhaust that supply, we can explore ways to bring those Mechs into the fold.

MATADOR: When will you add opportunity to sort owned mechs in mechlab automaticly by name, tonnage e.t.c. or manually by drag and drop or click some buttons (for example left and right arrows)?
A: Many of these options will be available with UI 2.0 coming out late summer.

Ngamok: We know the last 3 mechs coming out will give each weight class 5 mechs to choose from with the exception of the Assault Class. Is there a planned 5th Assault Mech in the works before Clan Mechs are introduced?
A: Yes, you should see an Assault Mech in July.
Redshift2k5: Could we see a schedule for 'mech tweaks'? Still a lot of chassis that need to be looked at.
A: Paul and David will be looking at every chassis in the summer time, once we get some other higher priority weapon tuning done.

Sparkymarkyp: Are more damage textures going to be added to mech in the future? i.e. dents, bullet holes, armour panels blown away, sparking internals fires etc
A: For performance reasons, we have opted to reduce the amount of detail currently available. As time goes one, and players update their equipment, we can explore adding back in more fidelity.

Phobic Wraith: Any way we could get an "after action report" of some sort? I mean, it would be cool if we could see what went into our c-bill payout, like contract fulfilled (or not), damage done, repairs, reloads, salvage value, etc, etc. I mean, we're mercs. It's the almighty c-bill after all...
A: You currently have this available to you at the end of a match. With UI 2.0, players will also received an out-of-match AAR as well.

Source Control: Would it be possible to remove confirmation dialog boxes from within Mech Labs when switching between Loadout and Module tab if no changes have been made? It's annoying to have to click the OK button when you're browsing through your mechs and would provide a smoother user experience.
A: I’ll see if we can make this change for UI 2.0.

Maps/Environment:

Featherwood: On all maps I regularly see 'terra-morphing miracle', landscape geometry flexes and changes - that's really annoying at times. Is there ETA for fix or any workaround how to stop it?
A: This is intended behavior and part of the Level of Detail (LOD) terrain system inside the CryEngine. Popping/clipping/missing geometry on the other hand are either rendering bugs, or video card driver issues.

Skalpel: Any chance for dynamic weather? As in random time of day (mornin, midday, dusk) and sometimes rain sometimes pure blue skies.. It would give a lot to the dynamic and beauty of the game.
A: We currently have this in Frozen City, and will be added to more map variants in the future.

9erRed: Will future graphical and engine improvements allow for true cover from view, and provide some disruption of fire?
A: We have true cover currently, with exception of some destructible objects like trees.

Zhiel: Are there any plans to address the missing textures (or fail to load) on the Frozen City maps?
A: If it has been reported to support@mwomercs.com, then we have it in our JIRA database, and it will be looked into.

3Xtr3m3: Will PGI ever introduce Air Composition variations and Gravity variations that will strongly effect mechs and mech weapons?
A: We’re looking into low grav, however it’s a very risky change to the mechanics of gameplay.

KuruptU4Fun: Will there ever be environmental conditions that will effect the landscape? Like a avalanche/ rock slide that would cut off an avenue in a map in Tourmaline or Forest? Or something like a variant of a map that has a thunderstorm and lightning strikes would blind those using (night/ heat vision) temporarily?
A: We’d love to do this and will eventually get to a point where level designers can add stateful gameplay objects that play nice with our server authoritative architecture.

Weapons & Loadouts

Mahws: Really happy to see the recent command chair post on weapon balancing, doubly so that we can expect them in the next patch. Any word on balancing changes to single heat sinks though? Would be good to see viable non-DHS builds.
A: This will be looked at again closer to or after launch.

Koniving: Will it be possible for flamers to emit a field of smoke? Or any smoke effects?
A: I’ll let the BT/science wizzes comment, but I’m pretty sure it’s engine plasma, which does not really create smoke until it contacts with a surface.

Krzysztof z Bagien: Do you have any plans to change existing or add some new types of crosshairs to make it more "marksman friendly" (like making it more transparent or changing the shape of it)? Right now it obscures the target a lot, and when you have lock-on weapons you can barely see what's under the reticule.
A: Eventually we plan to allow more HUD customizations, including color.

Pencilboom: What do you guys feel about large weapons boating? And what are you guys planning to do to prevent them from creating game imbalances?
A: This is something that Paul is looking into currently and he will post a CC statement on his findings. We’re also exploring incentivizing players to balance out their BattleMechs better on a personal and team level in addition to small tuning changes.

Thontor: Once HSR makes hit detection reliable for all weapons, can we expect to see more frequent balance changes, of simple weapon variable numbers, possibly every patch?
A: We make changes to balance at least once a month and will continue to do so.

Arhurt: When can we expect all mechs to have the actual weapon models change as we add/change weapons (similarly to the Highlanders)? Can we expect, for example, the ballistic spot on the CDA-3M to change to an MG or a LBX-10 if we so change the loadout? Would a spider actually have a huge PPC sticking out it's chest?
A: Eventually.

FrostCollar: What's the dev team's vision for indirect fire? There are two tools that have specific abilities that help facilitiate it (TAG, NARC) and one piece of equipment that has little purpose except to help protect you from it (AMS), yet the only system that we have with the capability to fire indirectly is the LRM and right now few use them compared to direct fire weapons.
A: For now this is the only indirect fire weapon.

JaniTheWeedman: Are there any plans for improving advanced zoom module? I understand that PiP is a problem, why not make it a plain x4 zoom? (without the PiP function)
A: The rendering team will be looking at it in the future.

RenegadeMaster: Can you contrast how the upcoming Seismic Sensor Module and existing 360 Target Retention modules will be similar or different from one another?
A: Seismic Senor detects BattleMech movement. Retention maintains a target after you have received an IDENT. They work hand in hand.

C12AZyED: Are you considering making changes to the Flamer to make it more viable in realistic combat scenarios?
A: Yes in the May 21st patch.

FullMetalJackass: Are there any plans to increase the theatrics of the artillery strike? I like the damage it does but it seems to be very lacking the looks department
A: Yes.

ZnSeventeen: In regards to critical slot splitting, as happens in the King Crab, will you ever consider having different numbers of critical slots in specific mechs as their "quirk." Ex: King Crab gets extra arm crits and fewer torso crits so the problems of slot splitting would be allayed.
A: It’s a very specific TT rule. Right now we’re not looking to add it.

Foust: Has there been consideration given to adding minimum ranges to other extended range weapons such as the ER PPC and Gauss Rifle similar to LRM's and the PPC?
A: No plans to do so as this was one of the benefits of these weapons.

Wispsy: At least on certain mechs (Jenner for one) SSRMs only hit the front ct, even if the mech is directly behind you you can die with full back armour. Is there any plans to change this at all considering how quickly they can kill lights right now?
A: Currently the SSRMs will randomly hit one of 8 bones on a Mech. The cluster of these bones is generally around the CT area. In addition to a large splash damage effect, and damage transfer – most of the damage is ending up on the CT, even though the missiles are actually hitting at different locations on the mech. It’s not actually a bug, rather a tuning fix to minimize splash damage. This tuning adjustment will go live in the first patch of June. Unfortunately, the fix was a tad late for the 21st patch.

StalaggtIKE: What are some details or updates of the following within information warfare:
· active/passive radar? – After launch.
· vision modes? - No changes for now. Except for performance related.
· BAP?
· NARC?
· TAG?
· Command Console? – Waiting for design. Higher priority items are pushing this back.
· ECM?
A: Please take a look at the Command Chair Forum for the latest information on the rest: http://mwomercs.com/...-command-chair/

Gameplay/Game modes/Meta

3rdworld: With 12v12 coming: What do you believe is the maximum number of players / mechs you could put in a game world while delivering a good gaming experience?
Example: Is it technologically possible/feasible to have a 50v50 mechwarrior match or would the network/computer requirements be to great?
A: It’s hard question to answer. With each additional player, fidelity has to go down. We’d have to rewrite a large portion of the CryEngine to support more than 24, as it was built for humanoid PVP, not giant mechanized beasts. Theoretically, if we improved the renderer, streaming engine, networking code, and reduced the fidelity by a factor, we could push player counts higher. The game/gameplay would be completely different as well.

Metafox: Do you have any future plans to accommodate groups of 5+ players who want to play together but are unable to fill a full 12-man?
A: Yes. We’re getting close to feeling confident in the matchmaker, which is the sole reason for not allowing it currently.

urbeker: Are there any plans to make scouting easier, such as adding something above the range finder in the hud showing what grid you are looking at or a key to call out contact in the grid you are looking at?
A: Interesting idea.

BFett: In Dev Blog 3 it states that "Each BattleMech chassis has its own pool of XP and custom Tech Tree. At certain branch points in the BattleMech Tech Tree, a Pilot Point is awarded to the player." When can we expect to see pilot points in the game, and if they are not being implemented then what can we expect to see for more customized play?
A: I have answered this question a few times. We moved away from trees, in favor of the current system, which affords the player more choice.

ElLocoMarko: Is the base capture rate for assault mode being assessed.... perhaps to include map size as a factor... ?
A: It’s right about where we want it. See this tweet about the stats - https://twitter.com/...830885091119106

DeathofSelf: What is your reason behind the decision to not reintroduce collisions/knockdowns until after launch?
A: Priorities mostly. The same people needed to work on Collisions are needed to work on CW and UI 2.0.

Draz McMillen: Any chance, down the line, of a hardcore mode where damage or mech destruction results in repairs or loss of the mech?
A: Maybe.

grayson marik: Will we be able to match one premade group of any size against an other specific premade group of same size any time soon to prevent the frustration of being forced to syncdrop multiple 4 men groups just to play together with our friends and without not needed nor wanted pug fillers in our match?
A: See previous answer (up a few).

TexAss: Why don't we get capture assist bonuses in Conquest?
A: You’re not capturing a base. You’re accumulating resources.

Lilslugger: Would it be possible to switch between 1st and 3rd person view when spectating another player after death rather than only seeing 1st person?
A: Probably.

Weaselball: I've heard a particularly disheartening rumor that, aside from simply stepping away from the game for weeks at a time, there is no real way to lower one's current ELO. If you're stuck in a bracket that you got in because of a series of exceptionally lucky games, you're screwed. Is this true?
A: Absolutely not true. The only way to change your Elo score is to play the game and win or lose. Being idle keeps your score exactly where it is.

Surtr: I've always been fond of the canon portrayals of mech combat being carried out primarily by lighter groups of mechs (lights and mediums) so with that in mind: Will there ever be an option to play in a specific weight bracket, or set of weight brackets?
A: Possibly.

Timuroslav: Can we expect Bigger Matches ie: 12+players versus 12+players on a 7kmsq map in the Far Far Far Far Far Far future? I'm hoping for 32vs 32 Thrashing Trashing Thursdays
A: Just 12 v 12 for now.

Kmieciu: People using macros is a sign that the game controls could be improved. What's the official response for these ideas that have been floating around forums since closed beta?:
- changing ultra autocannons behavior: hold button for single fire (no jam, like regular autocannons), tap to double fire (a risk of jamming)
- chain fire with shorter delay between shots (usefull for AC2)
- ability to toggle TAG on/off (just like missile bay doors)
Anyone with a macro can already do all that, why not helping new players by giving everyone the same opportunities?
A: We’re going to look at any macros that may pose a balance issue and see if anything needs to be addressed in gameplay.

Miscenalleous

MoonUnitBeta: How come mechs running animation seems to roller skate or slide forward along the ground when they start running? Is it some kind of sync error?
A: The rate of movement through space does not always match the rate of animation. It’s almost impossible to get right 100% time in a game’s real time engine simulation.

Cubivorre: Is there a confirmed date for DX11, or at least a 'good chance' ETA?
A: Between now and launch.

Dr B00t: Are there any plans to expand the options? i.e. mouse sensitivity bar, depth of field, and depth of vision and other graphics settings
A: Yes.

Zerberus: Currently Heat Vision causes a 5-10 fps drop on many systems, hurting it`s usefulness for some players that don`t have the newest and best PC (because you essentially either have to choose between Heat Vision or playable framerates). Is this being actively tweaked?
A: Not actively, but I’ll pass it along.

Citizen Erased: Shall we be able to hear Betty announcing the classical "target destroyed" ? The only orgasmic boomish thing that is missing to me...
A: We plan to do a recording pass in the future once a few more features go into the game.

Spawnsalot: What's PGI's stance on things like sound mods? I'd love to mod the audio to give the weapon sounds a more harsh but muffled quality for instance, or more jarring, echoey weapon impacts and a more noticeable reactor hum.
A: We’d prefer it if players elected not to modify any PAK files as it invalidates your build and makes it near impossible for us to provide support.

Mattiator: With many of us clamoring over the music seen in the "Misery" trailer, are there any plans or possiblity that we will see a soundtrack release featuring Sean Kolton's tracks used in the trailers?
A: I’ll see what we can do.

NextGame: Can we have downloadable versions of the music from the mwo videos that have been put out to date (particularly the illmerica cover, and the one from the Misery video)?
A: See above.

paladinowp: Will there be a chance of releasing book -> Art of MechWarrior Online in the future? And... ETA if possible? =)
A: See above x 2.

BlueSanta: Have you thought about doing any videos of the studio and yourselves to make yourselves and your work more personable to the community? We only ever read what you write or see a couple of you in interviews. Why not do a walk through of the studio, meet the team short interviews, or the like? It's easy for people to rage at essentially strangers who they only know of inside the game. I'd like to see your real life selves fleshed out a little.
A: We’d love to.

LonestarrSB: I know you guys work hard on updating the game with new things. With regards to new content coming up you post very occasionally on the forums with content roadmaps and screen shots now and again with screen grabs of some new content. My question is, Is it possible to get more of that information displayed on the main page of the website? Even if it's just concept or just ideas or screenshots. A front page that has more updates and plans posted is good for new and old players alike.
A: We’re going to be amending the news roll on the front page to add more of these updates, which are typically found in the Command Chair section of the forums.

Willie Sauerland: If you guys were able to get a Mulligan, what would you go back and completely rip out of the current game so you could do it differently?
A: The UI.

Cockpit, HUD & Customizations

IqfishLP: Any Updates on the Cockpit Screens? It would add a HUGE amount of realism to the mech's cockpit, instead of just showing "no signal".
A: Eventually. It’s low priority currently.

Ramien: Will there ever be an option to change the camo colors or patterns for just specific parts of a 'Mech?
A: The system only allows for a global pattern changes and up to three color channels.

Terran123rd: We know there's going to be swappable heads/torsos/legs/etc, but what about other options for customization, like weapon effects (in-client only) or custom skins (as opposed to the standard camo skins you can buy from the micro-store)?What are the chances of things like that?
A: Reasonable over time.

Fat Amy: Any chance of a sophisticated damage-display? Like switching between different schematics (like the bar-diagram in mw4) to assess damage to specific mech-parts? The color-schematic we have now doesnt do it for me! This could even be something for those inactive monitors in the cockpit.
A: The HUD will be getting some updates after we finish UI 2.0.

Elric von Rabenfels: Now that hero mechs are paintable, will founder mechs also be fully colourable in the near future?
A: Yes.

Vegalas: Are there any plans of bringing down the paint costs permanently or making tweaks that would make it cheaper to buy a camo otherwise? At the moment paint and camo cost are so high that buying a mech is cheaper than buying a camo with certain paints.
A: We are always looking at ways to bring more value to the player.

Karl Streiger: Are there any plans in moving to bring "canon" paint schemes?
Lyran Royal Guards?
Alliance Jaegers?
Lyran Guards?
Davion Guards?
A: Yes with CW. Although not necessarily those specific units, as they are still TBD.

Forum/Website/Sales and Tournaments:

FireDog: Would you consider letting your fan/player base submit draft ISN News Flash reports for possible MWO forum transmission? In addition to lighting the leg work for your staff, it could be setup as a fun weekly/daily competition with small rewards (MC, C-bills, GXP, hud items, mech colors, etc.) for winning ISN news stories getting published. The MWO team would of course be the final authority in all reports.
A: I think it’s a very neat idea! Randall currently provides all of the content for the ISN feed. Eventually this will also include automated battle reports and other fluff.

Scromboid: Will there be any more 'Founders Type' sales? For clan invasion or release, maybe?
A: You never know.

Lusankya: Will you be introducing more premium time options (ie: 6 hour or 12 hour intervals) in the future?
A: Not plans to add sub day premium time concepts - yet.

Edited by miSs, 17 May 2013 - 01:11 PM.


#2 MavRCK

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 1,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationMontreal - Vancouver

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:12 PM

Wow. Awesome. Can't wait for fall. :ph34r: But please let skill determine gameplay -- all this RNG is driving me nuts (heat override, UAC jamming, and now JJs? )

Edited by MavRCK, 17 May 2013 - 12:15 PM.


#3 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:21 PM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 17 May 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

Adridos: What is the team's stance on the issue of "entry requirements" being raised?
Currently, for a mech to be usable, it needs to get upgraded by DHS, ES and have all it's efficiences skilled up, otherwise it is gimping itself in the match. There are already mentions of expanded pilot trees, epics and such and it may very well become a serious issue. Thus I would like to know the official stance on this.
A: This is entirely subjective. It depends at which level you play at. From my 1 in hundreds of thousands of player view, I can roll into a match with a stock Mech and be very competitive, and get lots of enjoyment. I may not be able to compete for 1st place all the time, but I can usually place in the top 8 no sweat. Your skill and Elo rating will definitely drive the level of competitive play you will face, and therefore the requirement to bring a more efficient, upgraded `Mech to the match. This is working as intended, and plays nicely in with how a player’s skill and inventory evolve over time.


I facepalmed when I read "stock mech" and "competitive" in the same sentence, when the Trial Jagermech-S is an abomination.

#4 Moogles

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 183 posts

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:26 PM

View PostDeathlike, on 17 May 2013 - 12:21 PM, said:


I facepalmed when I read "stock mech" and "competitive" in the same sentence, when the Trial Jagermech-S is an abomination.


My favorite part is how he said "one in hundreds of thousands of players",,...

Maybe hundreds of thousands of accounts were created, but you're one of maybe six thousand people online at peak hours. If that.

#5 Elric von Rabenfels

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 110 posts

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:30 PM

Quote

Elric von Rabenfels: Now that hero mechs are paintable, will founder mechs also be fully colourable in the near future?
A: Yes.


:ph34r:

Thank you.

Edited by Elric von Rabenfels, 17 May 2013 - 12:30 PM.


#6 Sparkymarkyp

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 187 posts

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:30 PM

Got my question answered! first time I asked one too lol :ph34r:

#7 JudgeDeathCZ

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Brother
  • Big Brother
  • 1,928 posts

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:31 PM

Thanks for answers :ph34r:

I rly like this one
Arhurt: When can we expect all mechs to have the actual weapon models change as we add/change weapons (similarly to the Highlanders)? Can we expect, for example, the ballistic spot on the CDA-3M to change to an MG or a LBX-10 if we so change the loadout? Would a spider actually have a huge PPC sticking out it's chest?
A: Eventually.

#8 Rebas Kradd

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,969 posts

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:40 PM

One of the less informative ATD's to be sure, but thanks anyway for the correspondence.

#9 DEMAX51

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 2,269 posts
  • LocationThe cockpit of my Jenner

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:45 PM

Thank god the "SSRMs only doing real damage to the CT" is going to be addressed on Tuesday. You've made my day, Bryan!

#10 Huntsman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 646 posts

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:51 PM

Since in the history of "ask the devs" I've had every single one of my questions ignored, may I at least get an answer to the question "why am I being ignored?"

I'm starting to develop a complex here...

#11 Regina Redshift

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 281 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:52 PM

Quote

Adridos: What is the team's stance on the issue of "entry requirements" being raised?
Currently, for a mech to be usable, it needs to get upgraded by DHS, ES and have all it's efficiences skilled up, otherwise it is gimping itself in the match. There are already mentions of expanded pilot trees, epics and such and it may very well become a serious issue. Thus I would like to know the official stance on this.
A: This is entirely subjective. It depends at which level you play at. From my 1 in hundreds of thousands of player view, I can roll into a match with a stock Mech and be very competitive, and get lots of enjoyment. I may not be able to compete for 1st place all the time, but I can usually place in the top 8 no sweat. Your skill and Elo rating will definitely drive the level of competitive play you will face, and therefore the requirement to bring a more efficient, upgraded `Mech to the match. This is working as intended, and plays nicely in with how a player’s skill and inventory evolve over time.


Re: Elo and new 'mechs
I see your point, I really do. I kitted out my 4SP (my 3rd Hunchback) before I launched it into a single match, and that worked decently well for me. However, when I tried the same thing for my 1st Spider, I got my backside handed to me. That's because it was a whole new chassis, not just a variant. I felt like I was being punished for branching out. By the time I picked up my 2nd Spider, it was less of an issue, but basicing out my 1st Spider was a chore.

What I'm saying is, the system seems an awful lot like a penalty for purchasing wholly new 'mech chassis. Isn't that exactly the opposite of what you want?

#12 DeathofSelf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 655 posts
  • LocationChicago

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:56 PM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 17 May 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

Ask the Devs #38

Sparkymarkyp: Are more damage textures going to be added to mech in the future? i.e. dents, bullet holes, armour panels blown away, sparking internals fires etc
A: For performance reasons, we have opted to reduce the amount of detail currently available. As time goes one, and players update their equipment, we can explore adding back in more fidelity.



For Realz? It's getting really hard to still have faith in this game

Quote



DeathofSelf: What is your reason behind the decision to not reintroduce collisions/knockdowns until after launch?
A: Priorities mostly. The same people needed to work on Collisions are needed to work on CW and UI 2.0.



Am I the only one who sees this as a huge problem? This is a MAJOR aspect of the game... I can't wait for disaster that is sure to happen when you try to put this back in after launch. Not only all the crying from people who learned the game without this, but you guys don't exactly have the best track record for implementing things correctly the first time around.

#13 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 17 May 2013 - 12:58 PM

View PostArchwright, on 17 May 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:


Re: Elo and new 'mechs
I see your point, I really do. I kitted out my 4SP (my 3rd Hunchback) before I launched it into a single match, and that worked decently well for me. However, when I tried the same thing for my 1st Spider, I got my backside handed to me. That's because it was a whole new chassis, not just a variant. I felt like I was being punished for branching out. By the time I picked up my 2nd Spider, it was less of an issue, but basicing out my 1st Spider was a chore.

What I'm saying is, the system seems an awful lot like a penalty for purchasing wholly new 'mech chassis. Isn't that exactly the opposite of what you want?


The Spider wouldn't be affected in the same sense.. since currently each weight class has their own ELO. Your point would make more sense if you tried a Cicada (a different medium) - since that mech operates very differently than a Hunchback and you'd get slammed initially for not playing it more like a light.

There should be different ELO for each variant, not just each chassis... and the starting ELO should always be similar to the previous variant or last mech in the same weight class and start a bit lower than the average ELO of your other variants.. and go from there. Starting from your last variant/chassis's ELO is "too high" to be accurate when you're just starting out with a completely different chassis.

Edited by Deathlike, 17 May 2013 - 12:59 PM.


#14 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

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

Posted 17 May 2013 - 01:01 PM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 17 May 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

Ask the Devs #38

StalaggtIKE: What are some details or updates of the following within information warfare:
· active/passive radar? – After launch.
· vision modes? - No changes for now. Except for performance related.
· BAP?
· NARC?
· TAG?
· Command Console? – Waiting for design. Higher priority items are pushing this back.
· ECM?
A: Please take a look at the Command Chair Forum for the latest information on the rest: http://mwomercs.com/...-command-chair/



Which thread were you trying to link to here?

Edited by miSs, 17 May 2013 - 01:10 PM.
quote edited


#15 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 17 May 2013 - 01:01 PM

View PostDeathofSelf, on 17 May 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

Am I the only one who sees this as a huge problem? This is a MAJOR aspect of the game... I can't wait for disaster that is sure to happen when you try to put this back in after launch. Not only all the crying from people who learned the game without this, but you guys don't exactly have the best track record for implementing things correctly the first time around.


Currently, the game really does suffer from lack of new stuff to do (no new modes) outside of grinding new mechs as they come through the pipeline. Plus, there are a lot of other issues like convergence, PPCs/poptarting, and even just hit registration, which demand more attention than just "collisions".

#16 PoLaR

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • The Vicious
  • 620 posts
  • LocationEast Bay

Posted 17 May 2013 - 01:01 PM

Excellent answers again this week!

Reallllylyyyy looking forward to Tuesday! Might have to play sick from work :ph34r:

#17 DeathofSelf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • Bridesmaid
  • 655 posts
  • LocationChicago

Posted 17 May 2013 - 01:06 PM

View PostDeathlike, on 17 May 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:


Currently, the game really does suffer from lack of new stuff to do (no new modes) outside of grinding new mechs as they come through the pipeline. Plus, there are a lot of other issues like convergence, PPCs/poptarting, and even just hit registration, which demand more attention than just "collisions".



Perhaps, but waiting until after launch is insane.

Edit: I also think part of the large amount of bugs we have right now is due to pushing new content before fixing previously implemented content

Edit Edit: not much can be done about it now though I guess (short of delaying launch), I just feel like this game is starting to come apart at the seams.

Edited by DeathofSelf, 17 May 2013 - 01:08 PM.


#18 Ramsess

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Butcher
  • The Butcher
  • 104 posts
  • LocationBrossard

Posted 17 May 2013 - 01:06 PM

ElLocoMarko: Is the base capture rate for assault mode being assessed.... perhaps to include map size as a factor... ?
A: It’s right about where we want it. See this tweet about the stats - https://twitter.com/...830885091119106

Wow so as per the Twitter info... 40%!!!! of games end by cap after 3 ppl die...wooooo that's nothing to be worried about.... even 10% at 0 deaths is stupid high....

#19 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 17 May 2013 - 01:07 PM

View PostDeathofSelf, on 17 May 2013 - 01:06 PM, said:

Perhaps, but waiting until after launch is insane.


I saw the Jenner football vid. I loled a lot. I can wait for its epic return in some future.

#20 Nicholas Carlyle

    Member

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

Posted 17 May 2013 - 01:09 PM

View PostBryan Ekman, on 17 May 2013 - 12:00 PM, said:

Ask the Devs #38

ElLocoMarko: Is the base capture rate for assault mode being assessed.... perhaps to include map size as a factor... ?
A: It’s right about where we want it. See this tweet about the stats - https://twitter.com/...830885091119106


This answer really bugs me, I can't see twitter at work, but unless that's a new tweet I haven't read, it doesn't get very specific.

Is this the 79%/21% tweet?

If so, can you elaborate on the statistics on specific maps, specifically the larger ones? I have a hard time believing that Alpine and River City having the same capture time requirements is balanced properly considering the size differences.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users