Jumpjet "shake" Just Broke Half The Combat In This Game For Me.
#101
Posted 04 June 2013 - 01:05 PM
In other news, only one camp is right and PGI cannot be allowed to find a compromise solution, even when that solution is in keeping with TT. Any concession given to any player feedback is just PGI caving to forum whiners. They should, however, listen more to ME, because my incoherent rage posts in which I bang obscenities into my keyboard with oven mitts is clearly more important than yours. Just like my fun is more important than your fun.
#102
Posted 04 June 2013 - 01:07 PM
#103
Posted 04 June 2013 - 01:18 PM
Like leaves in the autumn wind /
Bad poptart was noob.
#105
Posted 04 June 2013 - 01:23 PM
#106
Posted 04 June 2013 - 01:27 PM
the craptastic "climbing jets" that everyone here keeps calling "Jumpjets" when 90% of the time I see mechs scalling buildings or mountains with them is the truly laughable part, nevermind that a Jenner with 5 Jumpjets doesnt "jump" it hops around using jets to climb up ledges and such.
#107
Posted 04 June 2013 - 01:30 PM
Colonel Pada Vinson, on 04 June 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:
the craptastic "climbing jets" that everyone here keeps calling "Jumpjets" when 90% of the time I see mechs scalling buildings or mountains with them is the truly laughable part, nevermind that a Jenner with 5 Jumpjets doesnt "jump" it hops around using jets to climb up ledges and such.
Yeah... I want mechs to be launched large distances horizontally when they jet, not just kinda levitate.
#108
Posted 04 June 2013 - 01:31 PM
Colonel Pada Vinson, on 04 June 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:
the craptastic "climbing jets" that everyone here keeps calling "Jumpjets" when 90% of the time I see mechs scalling buildings or mountains with them is the truly laughable part, nevermind that a Jenner with 5 Jumpjets doesnt "jump" it hops around using jets to climb up ledges and such.
it's like skiing. except up hill and faster than either running or jumping.
#109
Posted 04 June 2013 - 01:33 PM
Hotthedd, on 04 June 2013 - 12:33 PM, said:
This. I've dropped in my F and D, didn't notice any difference in actual results/damage/kills/fun, but the immersion got better. Using pre-patch JJ's felt a little like paragliding.
#110
Posted 04 June 2013 - 01:53 PM
This way no motion sickness, no backlash nerfs to the people who use the JJ for maneuvering and positioning.
#111
Posted 04 June 2013 - 02:00 PM
Avatara, on 04 June 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:
This way no motion sickness, no backlash nerfs to the people who use the JJ for maneuvering and positioning.
i think the leg damage was reduced to stop light mechs from taking leg damage from simply running around. i think if the leg damage were exponential (like falling motion) it would make that part feel more real. at low levels the mech legs can properly absorb the fall, but as you increase the height impact force increases greatly.
i still like the jump jet shake though.
#112
Posted 04 June 2013 - 02:08 PM
blinkin, on 04 June 2013 - 02:00 PM, said:
i still like the jump jet shake though.
This didn't make sense, and it still doesn't make sense. A heavier Mech should take more damage than a light Mech when falling from the same height, because it's heavier -> the legs have to absorb more energy from the falling. Of course, heavier Mechs have bigger legs, but still...
Btw, I like the JJ shake, but the game still has a LONG LONG way to go before weapon balancing is fine. PGI doesn't seem to play their own game, otherwise they wouldn't always mess up the balancing. Most times they nerfed op setups to the ground, not actually balancing them reasonably, while failing to buff other weapons like MGs or the Flamer.
So for the future of the game: Poptarting may be gone, but watch out, the next Fotm build is just around the corner.
Edited by MoeX, 04 June 2013 - 02:14 PM.
#113
Posted 04 June 2013 - 02:11 PM
Non-pop-tarter here, for the record. Just use Jump Jets to clear obstacles and turn faster in a brawl.
#114
Posted 04 June 2013 - 02:22 PM
MoeX, on 04 June 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:
This didn't make sense, and it still doesn't make sense. A heavier Mech should take more damage than a light Mech when falling from the same height, because it's heavier -> the legs have to absorb more energy from the falling. Of course, heavier Mechs have bigger legs, but still...
Your last line covered it.. smaller mechs have thinner legs, lighter gyros, and smaller shock absorbers. If anything, larger mechs should take the same or less damage (thicker metal, bigger absorbers, etc). For fairness, I would argue range be equal.. forgetting a real system might be the other way ...
#115
Posted 04 June 2013 - 02:24 PM
WaddeHaddeDudeda, on 04 June 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:
Now in midair my crosshair (and cockpit) is shaking whilst it stays calm when I'm running 140+ kph downhill?
Serious simulation is serious.
I see CoD having better solutions.
Solution is simple, add some crosshair/cockpit shake while running to simulate the +2 penalty for running.
#116
Posted 04 June 2013 - 02:27 PM
Edited by Teir Dasande, 04 June 2013 - 02:28 PM.
#117
Posted 04 June 2013 - 02:32 PM
Shinikaru, on 04 June 2013 - 10:58 AM, said:
... really?
You consider balancing out game play mechanics to prevent one tactic from dominating everything else to be "vanilla"? If anything this recent patch legitimizes other builds and allows for more viable tactics.
Shinikaru, on 04 June 2013 - 10:58 AM, said:
Uh huh...
Shinikaru, on 04 June 2013 - 10:58 AM, said:
A: This is still a beta test so we're supposed to report anything that throws gameplay off balance, which is what poptarting did
B: I'm not entirely sure it was a minority, and "whining" is not the way I'd describe it... well, maybe in some cases.
Shinikaru, on 04 June 2013 - 10:58 AM, said:
...USE JUMP JETS AS A MEANS OF FIRING OVER A TEAMMATE IN A CLOSE IN BRAWL.
You can't hit a hostile in a "close in brawl"? I haven't sampled the newest iteration of JJ's so I could be wrong, but that sounds more like user error.
Shinikaru, on 04 June 2013 - 10:58 AM, said:
You mean JJ's are now only useful for faster maneuvering and don't turn Highlanders into aerial weapons platforms!? *GASP*
#119
Posted 04 June 2013 - 02:38 PM
Gallowglas, on 04 June 2013 - 01:05 PM, said:
In other news, only one camp is right and PGI cannot be allowed to find a compromise solution, even when that solution is in keeping with TT. Any concession given to any player feedback is just PGI caving to forum whiners. They should, however, listen more to ME, because my incoherent rage posts in which I bang obscenities into my keyboard with oven mitts is clearly more important than yours. Just like my fun is more important than your fun.
You win! Come on down and collect your prize!
w0rm, on 04 June 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:
****
#120
Posted 04 June 2013 - 02:42 PM
The actual screen shake is a really too much. I am starting to get a head ache. But like with any major correction, PGI has going to one extreme before settling on something in the middle.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users























