25 replies to this topic

[Trauglodyte]

Livewyr, on 01 July 2013 - 09:22 PM, said:

Things to consider regarding current topics:

Convergence: It's a nasty little ****** with the current pinpoint alpha meta- and it's not tabletop.
Consideration: Imagine removing convergence.. and then trying to fight a light mech. (Don't forget, convergence isn't TT, but neither is real time movement at 150kph with low profile shots.)
Removing convergence would undo everything HSR did when it came to streaks. HSR made the Laser Jenner a contender again.. even against the SSRM lights. Remove Convergence, and Streaks will be the light-fighting requirement.
Several other things related to that to consider.. but for a later time. (like Arm actuators and what the AS7 RS and Cataphract 3D would mean.)

Convergence is an issue because people don't understand it and then they go and make a million threads about something that they don't understand. All the while, the devs read the boards and shake their heads seeing the masses bitching about it while getting the "analysis" all wrong. They know what is wrong but it is the concept of getting it fixed, given the hardware, that is causing all of the problems. Convergence on torso weapons will be what we have no forever and ever because that is just how it is. Static weapons firing in one direction at one location. The problem is when arm mounted weapons come into play on top of the community's desire to obliterate targets in 1-2 button pushes all while ignore the implications of heat. That is why the Alpha Boating fix was put in to force players to worry about heat and to try to slow the alpha striking while PGI tries to figure out how to get the Arm Reticle - Torso Reticle convergence issue hammered down.

[Tolkien]

Trauglodyte, on 26 July 2013 - 08:44 AM, said:

Convergence is an issue because people don't understand it and then they go and make a million threads about something that they don't understand. All the while, the devs read the boards and shake their heads seeing the masses bitching about it while getting the "analysis" all wrong. They know what is wrong but it is the concept of getting it fixed, given the hardware, that is causing all of the problems. Convergence on torso weapons will be what we have no forever and ever because that is just how it is. Static weapons firing in one direction at one location. The problem is when arm mounted weapons come into play on top of the community's desire to obliterate targets in 1-2 button pushes all while ignore the implications of heat. That is why the Alpha Boating fix was put in to force players to worry about heat and to try to slow the alpha striking while PGI tries to figure out how to get the Arm Reticle - Torso Reticle convergence issue hammered down.

I think you have half of the picture, but want to encourage you to think forward to what will happen with future tech updates such as clan equipment. Assuming Clan tech stays close to the source material, clanners will have access to ER PPCs that do 15 damage, pulse lasers with nearly double the range, ultra autocannon 2's, 10's and 20's, and all of this will be lighter and more compact than inner sphere equivalents. It will be no trouble for a clan assault to mount 4x Ultra AC 10's, or a pair of gauss rifles and a pair of ERPPCs for a 60 damage alpha. Even a single clan Ultra 20 will be able to put 3-4 shells down rapidly if the RNG works out in its favour.

I contend that the more fundamental current issue that the heat penalty is trying to address is it's too easy to put a lot of damage in one spot on a mech. It's harder now that people who were using 4+PPCs have to fire in two groups 0.5 seconds apart, but it hasn't gone away.

I know there's a school of tought that says they will fix that later when clan tech comes out, but Paul has repeatedly stated such as with ECM that he didn't want to waste time making a lot of small change that would have to be undone later.... which is sort of what happened and what seems to be happening again here.

[Damocles69]

A competitive PVP game lives and dies on game balance.... this game has no balance thus it will die

[TurboChickenMan]

Damocles69, on 26 July 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

A competitive PVP game lives and dies on game balance.... this game has no balance thus it will die

Among competitive players, at least. Casuals may still be able to wring some fun out of it.

[Tolkien]

TurboChickenMan, on 26 July 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

Among competitive players, at least. Casuals may still be able to wring some fun out of it.

Players who have hung around this long are able to have fun, but the average amount of time any given player plays is limited to less than 10 hours before they hit the door. This means that more options and depth are needed, both in CW and in more diverse viable builds.

There will also be friction between casuals and others since those able and willing to game the system will always have a non-skill advantage over the uninitiated. Can't fix that, but it can be minimized by having a generally balanced system*.

*Unless the casual builds a flamer+LBX10 hunchback... nothing can save that.

edit: The stat of less than 10 hours before any given player is out the door comes from PGI themselves in their infographic here http://www.pcgamer.c...rify-engineers/

There they say 1.1 million players during open beta, and a total of 9.6 million hours played, or an average of 8.7 hours per player. So for every player that has put in thousands of games there are many who just do a few and head for the door

Edited by Tolkien, 27 July 2013 - 06:50 AM.

[stjobe]

Tolkien, on 27 July 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:

edit: The stat of less than 10 hours before any given player is out the door comes from PGI themselves in their infographic here http://www.pcgamer.c...rify-engineers/

There they say 1.1 million players during open beta, and a total of 9.6 million hours played, or an average of 8.7 hours per player. So for every player that has put in thousands of games there are many who just do a few and head for the door

Sure, and while I don't disagree that we need a more balanced, varied, and beginner-friendly game, I'd also like to point out that those numbers aren't anything remarkable for a F2P game; a very high percentage of the people trying a F2P game for a few hours never return. That's the way of the F2P games, they have to make their living off the small percentage that do stay for more than a few hours - and from those they have to make the big bucks on the 10% or so that ever pay anything.

Or in short: A F2P game's Average Revenue Per Player is very low (about a tenth of the ARPU of a P2P game), but the Average Revenue Per Paying Player can be as high or higher than the ARPPU for a P2P game.

It's getting those players to become paying players that's the trick.