140 replies to this topic

[LordBraxton]

Russ is on the island.

I guess we should all start using twitter to post feedback rather than the forums eh?

[Roland]

The posts aren't really mutually exclusive.
The game has serious issues.
The game is also in the best state it's ever been.

[Victor Morson]

Valore, on 25 June 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

Put it this way, pugging is still a horrible horrible experience, but I genuinely enjoy the game with my clan mates, and doing well in events like Last Mech Standing has been fantastic.

The game is literally a hundred times more fun when you can control it in a 8v8 environment, with leagues or practices. Because there is weight balancing and other imposable restrictions, it makes a night & day difference. 8-manning with my unit randomly is much less interesting as it forces you more or less to bring 6-7 Highlanders or deal with the inevitable 8 Highlander/Stalker camp team.

Part of why I go on about weight restrictions and such. While obviously you'd need a system to match everyone into 'mechs quickly and easily or to automate the process, it makes for a massively superior game.

RG Notch, on 25 June 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

Wow 2 MW LL players, that's amazing. I think if you get another dozen you might have every one who ever played that mod.

Like I said, the biggest fault of MWLL is being on a platform of an old game. Just because noone played it doesn't mean it didn't have some great ideas, many of which I know for a fact inspired design decisions in MW:O at first.

LordBraxton, on 25 June 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

Russ is on the island.

I guess we should all start using twitter to post feedback rather than the forums eh?

Does anyone here use Twitter? Someone should totally tweet slashbrb the link over here.

[Ronan]

Victor Morson, on 25 June 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

Maybe you haven't heard the people talking in chat in every other game you play lately. Or the fact that you are starting to recognize almost everyone still playing from the forums, rather than the other way around.

I think the forum opinion is much more representative than you think.

Plus if you're really happy with this "Sniper config + Recon only, forever and ever" meta we're forced to play if we want to win while PGI continues introducing systems that damage the game (Arm lock, 3rd person, the stupid alpha nerf), quite frankly, I cannot reason with you.

Your "people talking in chat" implies that you run with comms/TS. That limits your exposure. If you only see the same pilots over and over, you are definitely limited in your exposure to other players and play styles. So, in effect, you have a very limited anecdotal view. I don't see the same pilots over and over in-game, so my view is not the same as yours.

The place I do see the same names over and over is in the forums. This seems to indicate a limited active population, but that's anecdotal on my part.

I never said what I did or did not like about "the meta." I stated that non-PGI employees have a very limited view of the total player base. Whether I like, or use, the features you mention is not part of my post. Nor was my play style. As it happens, I don't run a sniper build on any of my mechs. If your posts are going to be mostly assumptions, quite frankly, I cannot reason with you.

[Valore]

Victor Morson, on 25 June 2013 - 03:22 PM, said:

The game is literally a hundred times more fun when you can control it in a 8v8 environment, with leagues or practices. Because there is weight balancing and other imposable restrictions, it makes a night & day difference. 8-manning with my unit randomly is much less interesting as it forces you more or less to bring 6-7 Highlanders or deal with the inevitable 8 Highlander/Stalker camp team.

Applies even for 4 man teams. If your 4 man has less than 2 Assaults, you run the risk of being massively outtonned by the other team. Which is just a vicious cycle excerbating the issue.

Edited by Valore, 25 June 2013 - 03:25 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Roland, on 25 June 2013 - 03:20 PM, said:

The posts aren't really mutually exclusive.
The game has serious issues.
The game is also in the best state it's ever been.

I agree stability wise, it is. Map wise, it is.

I disagree balance wise, though. I honestly think the pre-ECM weapon balance was more fun, even if some things were worse simply because you had a wide variety of viable builds.

[Dr B00t]

one thing you have to realize is that these f2p companies are more concerned about attracting new players rather than keeping the ones they have...hence all the 3PV crap...
world of tanks was like that too..

new player comes in...buys like 50 bucks in stuff...plays for a while...gets bored and moves on...
hard to convince someone to keep buying into something than it is to sucker a new player into a purchase
sucker might be too strong a word...but you get the point

[Victor Morson]

Ronan, on 25 June 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

Your "people talking in chat" implies that you run with comms/TS. That limits your exposure.

I'm talking about text chat. That everyone sees and has when they connect to a game.

If you haven't seen the building rage, perhaps you're not paying attention.

Dr B00t, on 25 June 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

one thing you have to realize is that these f2p companies are more concerned about attracting new players rather than keeping the ones they have...hence all the 3PV crap...
world of tanks was like that too..

... and they went about it by introducing the "Newbies get executed and curb stomped into the dust for their first 25 games!" trial 'mech system. So if that is indeed their only motivation, boy did they screw that up worse than anything else.

[Valore]

Dr B00t, on 25 June 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

one thing you have to realize is that these f2p companies are more concerned about attracting new players rather than keeping the ones they have...hence all the 3PV crap...
world of tanks was like that too..

new player comes in...buys like 50 bucks in stuff...plays for a while...gets bored and moves on...
hard to convince someone to keep buying into something than it is to sucker a new player into a purchase
sucker might be too strong a word...but you get the point

Well then hopefully the trick then is that they realise before its too late that MWO is different from WoT. All the BT fans will throw money at them repeatedly.

If every you needed evidence, look at the crazy Project Phoenix response.

Most people are still annoyed at certain aspects of the game. However if they offer great deals like that, people will pay out. AS LONG AS THE GAME IS NOT COMPLETE GARBAGE CAUSING RAGE.

Which at the moment, its mostly not. Its okay. Definitely could be better, but still okay.

[Dr B00t]

Victor Morson, on 25 June 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

But that's the problem: I really don't think it is. We've been doing this odd "Two steps forwards, three steps back" dance ever since closed beta. I'd argue game balance and the way matches play out are actually less interesting than they were last year right now.

You had viable different roles for a long time. Now there is only sniping.

i actually almost forgot that the big selling point for this game used to be "role-warfare" guess they threw that out w/ making a sim and listening to player feedback

[RG Notch]

Victor Morson, on 25 June 2013 - 03:22 PM, said:

Like I said, the biggest fault of MWLL is being on a platform of an old game. Just because noone played it doesn't mean it didn't have some great ideas, many of which I know for a fact inspired design decisions in MW:O at first.

Excuses, no one playing showed that is sure didn't have enough good ideas. No one playing showed that is was just a nice mod people did in their spare time and it looked it. The only thing it had going for it was it was the only MW mod around and despite how the success of the Founder's program showed there was clearly a desire for a MW product, no one played it. I get that there are loyal fans who probably got to know all the other fans and devs since no one but them played it, but I'm quiet sick of the rosy tinted memories people have of this mod.

[General Taskeen]

RG Notch, on 25 June 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

Wow 2 MW LL players, that's amazing. I think if you get another dozen you might have every one who ever played that mod.

Like I said, not my fault that LL has overall better weapon balance. Its not my fault the devs of MWO have patched balance together with bandaids. And FYI many of the LL players are on these forums, I'm just more vocal. But, since I am assuming you haven't tested it thoroughly all you are doing is jabbing. And like Victor already said, certain aspects of design in MWO are heavily influenced by MW:LL, and even borrowed ideas from that game (some for the worse, MW:LL MG does not work well in MWO, but that's what we have).

It doesn't remove the fact that they had good idea's for Battle Tech weaponry/equipment balance. There is nothing wrong with suggesting that level of high fidelity weapon/equipment balance in MWO, which MWO currently lacks. Its not about being loyal to a mod. When I see good balance, I test it and I suggest it.

Edited by General Taskeen, 25 June 2013 - 03:41 PM.

[RG Notch]

General Taskeen, on 25 June 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

Like I said, not my fault that LL has overall better weapon balance. Its not my fault the devs of MWO have patched balance together with bandaids. And FYI many of the LL players are on these forums, I'm just more vocal. But, since I am assuming you haven't tested it thoroughly all you are doing is jabbing. And like Victor already said, certain aspects of design in MWO are heavily influenced by MW:LL, and even borrowed ideas from that game (some for the worse, MW:LL MG does not work well in MWO, but that's what we have).

and it's not my fault no one played

[Roland]

Victor Morson, on 25 June 2013 - 03:24 PM, said:

I agree stability wise, it is. Map wise, it is.

I disagree balance wise, though. I honestly think the pre-ECM weapon balance was more fun, even if some things were worse simply because you had a wide variety of viable builds.

Dude, pre-ecm travel time weapons didn't work for 90% of the game's population.

Saying that the weapon balance was anything other than crap back then is ridiculous.

[Victor Morson]

RG Notch, on 25 June 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

Excuses, no one playing showed that is sure didn't have enough good ideas. No one playing showed that is was just a nice mod people did in their spare time and it looked it. The only thing it had going for it was it was the only MW mod around and despite how the success of the Founder's program showed there was clearly a desire for a MW product, no one played it. I get that there are loyal fans who probably got to know all the other fans and devs since no one but them played it, but I'm quiet sick of the rosy tinted memories people have of this mod.

If you think a mod running an a several year old game that got pulled from Steam because of EA dickery with absolutely no marketing and just word of mouth would ever have a chance at forming a huge community, you are insane.

People still do play it, but with no mechlab ever added and most people migrating to the game with more players because there were more players does not mean it was an even remotely bad mod. In many ways it did things vastly superior to MW:O, in particular when it comes to 'mech weapon balance.

MW4: Hardcore was also a "fan project" and I think most people regard that as the pinnacle of competitive MechWarrior in retrospect. Trying to knock it and claim it has no merit because it was a "fan project" is flat out stupid. Are you really claiming MW:O has to have superior balance because the guy happens to be paid to balance it?

All I am saying is MW:LL had it's own set of problems to be sure but it had plenty of merits and is a good place to look at weapon balance, which is spot on. To be honest in it's later releases it had more polish than many released games!

(MW:O flat out copied the LRM minimum range effects, the way beam lasers are duration fire, etc. from MW:LL and I will positively never believe otherwise as well. I'm sure the MW:LL team are happy to have contributed those ideas to the franchise.)

Edited by Victor Morson, 25 June 2013 - 03:42 PM.

[Fate 6]

Soy, on 25 June 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

Well, then, if they are really, really wanting a reason to come back - he just said that the game is in its best state ever, so... I mean...

I don't get it, this type of banal stuff is best left for 24/7 news channels analytical pundits and ESPN talking heads, not MWO I think, but w/e

Best state to date is a relative comparison to previous states of the game. That doesn't mean it's a reason to come back. And I'm not sure I agree it's in a great state - I though that the game around January or February was at its best

Edited by Fate 6, 25 June 2013 - 03:42 PM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I tweet at them, they rarely respond. I did get Garth all riled up recently.

Just blasted Paul with 4 tweets about balance.

[Further]

Wow... Im pretty livid at these guys for this, I put way too much money into this game, with the idea that it was going to something productive.

I just have this trucking bad image in my head of some PGI bros on vacation laughing about the whole thing thinking it's in good shape.

Listen.... I don't support the game financially because I think it's in good shape you F clowns.

#Grumpyashell

[General Taskeen]

RG Notch, on 25 June 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

and it's not my fault no one played

I'm not even sure what your point is anymore. I never played MW:LL until after MWO was released, to see what it was about and to test it out at face value, irregardless that it is a mod with few players. I play/test both and still do concurrently. I wanted to see the merit of its balance and how those idea's could be worked into MWO, since the devs already took bits and pieces from the game already. I still even play/test MW3, to find the good balance aspects of that game that might work in MWO.

Edited by General Taskeen, 25 June 2013 - 03:51 PM.

[Taj the White Tiger]

Lol, Russ's is obviously preparing for his MWO name change to Marie Antoinette