464 replies to this topic

[Kattspya]

Azzras, on 17 July 2013 - 05:26 AM, said:

You're right.
Why would I or anyone else subject themselves to the venom on these forums.
Let PGI know that you and your kind are the reason that people leave this game.

But according to PGI there is only a small part of the community on the forums so that won't be a problem then.

Where is my venom, if I may ask?

[Warge]

Azzras, on 17 July 2013 - 05:26 AM, said:

Let PGI know that you and your kind are the reason that people leave this game.

Me? Not the awful game balance? Ok, I should start my own buisness: ruin competitor's game by posting on forums criticism.
Man! I think you confuse a little cause and effects.

[Deathlike]

zwanglos, on 16 July 2013 - 09:09 PM, said:

Then there is a significant bug in how AC2s work. On testing grounds, if you have 4x AC2 linked to 2 firing groups that you fire .25 seconds apart, there is a point in the heat buildup where it jumps significantly. Firing off 2x AC2 should generate ~3-4% heat for example, but I'm observing that at some point it will generate almost 20% in a single volley of 2 AC2 rounds, but then taper off again. Oddly enough, it seems to always jump from 27% to 48%. Group firing all 4 AC2s together doesn't seem to generate the same absurd heat buildup.

Unrelated issue though, I guess. Might be some bug that slipped in. Sending in a ticket.

With respect to the AC2, I believe it has something to do with the timing... if you keep firing AC2s in a non-chain fire method (allowing for shots to occur every < .5 seconds), it starts to "accumulate" the heat timing, thus increasing the heat penalty. The only way to avoid this is straight group fire and/or a macro.

Effectively what is doing is treating the shots as if more than the limit of 4 AC2s (heat penalty for 5 or more) and that's causing additional heat penalties to be applied.

Edited by Deathlike, 17 July 2013 - 06:05 AM.

[WarHippy]

Azzras, on 17 July 2013 - 04:31 AM, said:

I've been here longer than you.
The only thing I HATE about this game is the forums.
It is things like your post that drive people away. Completely non-constructive and hostile.
If you want to know what's wrong with this game, look in the mirror.

This from the guy who wanted Little Jimmy to die and uninstall the game back on page 13 or 14. You actively try and push people out of the game and have the nerve to accuse others of it when all they do is voice their concern over bad mechanics. Your hypocrisy is showing.

[DEMAX51]

Deathlike, on 17 July 2013 - 06:04 AM, said:

With respect to the AC2, I believe it has something to do with the timing... if you keep firing AC2s in a non-chain fire method (allowing for shots to occur every < .5 seconds), it starts to "accumulate" the heat timing, thus increasing the heat penalty. The only way to avoid this is straight group fire and/or a macro.

Effectively what is doing is treating the shots as if more than the limit of 4 AC2s (heat penalty for 5 or more) and that's causing additional heat penalties to be applied.

There wasn't any heat penalty listed in the patch notes for AC2s, and I think I saw a post from Paul stating that they didn't plan to introduce one, so I'm assuming it's a bug.

[Deathlike]

DEMAX51, on 17 July 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

There wasn't any heat penalty listed in the patch notes for AC2s, and I think I saw a post from Paul stating that they didn't plan to introduce one, so I'm assuming it's a bug.

That's why QA @ PGI is pretty bad.

I suggest you take a look @ smurfy's for "unannounced penalties".

http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/


For a quick rundown of penalties that were not listed in the patch notes, here's a quick list for your reference:

AC2, limit 3 (whoops, had been interpreting as 4 for a bit), "multiplier" 1
ER Large, limit 2, "multiplier" 2.8

That's about it AFAIK.

Edited by Deathlike, 17 July 2013 - 06:58 AM.

[DEMAX51]

Deathlike, on 17 July 2013 - 06:58 AM, said:

That's why QA @ PGI is pretty bad.

I suggest you take a look @ smurfy's for "unannounced penalties".

http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/


For a quick rundown of penalties that were not listed in the patch notes, here's a quick list for your reference:

AC2, limit 3 (whoops, had been interpreting as 4 for a bit), "multiplier" 1
ER Large, limit 2, "multiplier" 2.8

That's about it AFAIK.

Thanks for the link - that's interesting. It sure would be nice if we could get an actual dev post detailing the specifics to this system. Overall, I like the changes, but we do need some clarity on things like this.

[mack sabbath]

It's nice for once, a major patch had no affect on me except buffing my srms....because I always run balanced builds that still wreck things.

[Pilotfish]

I've had really good experiences as a direct result of this patch. Brawling seems far far more viable and whilst snipers are still there I've suffered far less instant "Wait, where did my armour go?" moments.

Good job PGI. Maybe prepare your patch notes a little better next time though. There was some major confusion about exactly how the new heat system works.

[MechFrog1]

Tarzilman, on 17 July 2013 - 03:10 AM, said:

I really start to believe, that there are some people around here, paid for talking negative **** about this game and the developers. Sounds crazy? Yeah, my thoughts, too, but I've never been in forums with such a bad atmosphere like this.
Either this or some of you guys are really really disappointed about the development of this game. I can't understand so much negative energy, though I see some of your points.
Maybe the game just needs more time, yet the main-direction seems to be right, doesn't it? Release is in focus now and after that, details are following, I'm pretty sure. Maybe the release date is set too early, but PGI like all the other developers take part in the same game and the name of the game is money.
Stay constructive as most of you are, but calm down and be patient. At least the devs and their decisions are not the only reason, players are leaving, but also the very bad atmosphere in the community!

I read almost the exact same thing from someone when I was participating in the Hellgate London beta. Dismissing legitimate concerns and adopting a, "devs have it all figured out" attitude right or wrong does not make for a good game. Due to the actions of PGI, the system for providing and getting feedback from PGI on the development of MWO is incredibly difficult.

• Information on new game systems are not in patch notes, rather found in forum posts that many players may never see.
  
• Ask the Devs questions are increasingly limited, and the feedback is filtered to the point of absurdity.
  
• Information about what is coming for the game in this and future patches isn't found on the forums. It's found on cryptic twitter posts and through long NGNG podcasts.
  
• Those of us in the community with IT and game development experience have offered constructive ideas only to see them ignored in favor of adding increasingly complex systems to an already complex system in an attempt to fix it. Instead of using occam's razor to come up with common sense solutions, time is wasted on nonsense like this Heat "fix" that was circumvented by the min/maxers after five minutes of the servers going live. How much dev time was spent on this fix that didn't fix anything?
  
• The addition of shaking to jumpjets was a fix to the poptarting problem that plagued the game for months. Removing it now, seemingly without any concern to the fact that it just returned that tactic to the game, shows a lack of direction and an ability to see consequences of actions. This schizophrenic game design highlights a need for strong and experienced leadership.
  
• As outlined in the latest NGNG podcast, PGI stated that most of the major gameplay features expected during 2013 are bottle-necked behind the development of UI2.0. Several months ago when the forums were presented with mockups of how the UI2.0 might look, it was shocking to those with experience that they were just then getting to that stage when UI2.0 was supposed to have already been worked on for months by that point. To have a bottle-neck in your game design shows a serious flaw in the planning and execution of your game design. Again, this is something that could have been avoided.

Those of us who have seen many games come and go over the past 30 years have the experiences and perspective to see patterns in the successes and failures of many game ventures. There were true believers who shouted down the testers who said that games like Aion, Hellgate London, and Final Fantasy XIV were fundamentally broken. Being a true believer, instead of someone who is brave enough to make the criticisms when they're needed, doesn't make for a better game come release. Only when there are enough people standing up saying, "This is totally unacceptable" will PGI listen.

[A big brave boulder of meat]

I still don't understand poptart complaints. They are such predictable targets. And the shake dosent happen when you stop firing you're jets. It's a valid tactic that's easy to diffuse.

[arghmace]

HAZE05, on 17 July 2013 - 08:57 AM, said:

Good job PGI. Maybe prepare your patch notes a little better next time though. There was some major confusion about exactly how the new heat system works.

Is the confusion now gone? I still don't know how it works. Can you provide me with a link, please?

[Dr B00t]

BurntRemnants, on 16 July 2013 - 09:17 AM, said:

/o.o surprised no one mentioned the atlas.

why would they?...champion mechs seem like a silly purchase to me

[Dr B00t]

ToxicValor, on 16 July 2013 - 07:27 PM, said:

RogueTomato-
I still bought the package. They are basically re-writting the game with UI 2.0 which by no means is an easy feat.
There will ALWAYS be people there to complain. This that, entitlement, unreasonable comments etc.
There seems to be much more grippers here than I've ever seen for a starting game. I don't understand it.
I'm sure PGI doesn't appreciate it at all, nothing constructive about most of it.
They are working hard, I appreciate it. They do what they can, I appreciate it. So much so I bought the Phoenix package.

re-writing the game? did you even read what UI 2.0 is? its just the front end...it will not effect anything after you drop...

[Belorion]

mint frog, on 17 July 2013 - 09:34 AM, said:

I read almost the exact same thing from someone when I was participating in the Hellgate London beta. Dismissing legitimate concerns and adopting a, "devs have it all figured out" attitude right or wrong does not make for a good game. Due to the actions of PGI, the system for providing and getting feedback from PGI on the development of MWO is incredibly difficult.

Throwing an eTantrum does less for the game than not offering constructive criticism. Real issues get buried while inflammatory posts turn non-issues into issues that the dev team may have to deal with when it wasn't a real issue in the first place.

Take jump sniping for example. It was never a "problem" in that it was uncounterable. Its only problem was its FOTMiness. This problem would have most likely solved itself. However, now they have introduced a mechanic that makes pop-tarting harder to do. The people that were really good at it, can still do it. All they really did was counter the FOTMiness about poptarting. It was time, energy, and money spent on a task that would have corrected itself over time. When they could have been fixing real issues like the hit detection problem.

Another example is the real bug I submitted about the Heat System which quickly got burried under mountains of QQ threads about the new heat system. Anyone with two brain cells should realize that PGI will further flesh out the system as time goes on, and fix things like the LL ERLL loop hole. Their data will immediately point out that people are still using alphas with them. No complaining needed.

[Deathlike]

Belorion, on 17 July 2013 - 10:49 AM, said:

Take jump sniping for example. It was never a "problem" in that it was uncounterable. Its only problem was its FOTMiness. This problem would have most likely solved itself. However, now they have introduced a mechanic that makes pop-tarting harder to do. The people that were really good at it, can still do it. All they really did was counter the FOTMiness about poptarting. It was time, energy, and money spent on a task that would have corrected itself over time. When they could have been fixing real issues like the hit detection problem.

It adds to an somewhat artificial skill requirement, but it is actually an "intelligence" requirement that doesn't actually imply skill... it simply implies the separation between "those in the know", and "those who don't care/want to know". That's a sad separation.

Quote

Another example is the real bug I submitted about the Heat System which quickly got burried under mountains of QQ threads about the new heat system. Anyone with two brain cells should realize that PGI will further flesh out the system as time goes on, and fix things like the LL ERLL loop hole. Their data will immediately point out that people are still using alphas with them. No complaining needed.

If you leave PGI up to interpreting data... I have no confidence in them getting it translated correctly.

For instance, I simply used the "fun" cheese mech to outright kill a PGI dev in a recent game. Although the match itself resulted in a loss, I was still pretty much effective until dying. The higher level ELO/meta hasn't really changed even though brawling has been improved (probably from the SRM buff, but also people trying to figure out the half baked heat penalty system).

So, I dunno what to say really. Reasoned out arguments have been ignored by PGI often, so to assume they know what the negatives are is... laughable at best.

[Belorion]

Deathlike, on 17 July 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

If you leave PGI up to interpreting data... I have no confidence in them getting it translated correctly.

And the forum goers have a much better chance of figuring it out?

Deathlike, on 17 July 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

For instance, I simply used the "fun" cheese mech to outright kill a PGI dev in a recent game. Although the match itself resulted in a loss, I was still pretty much effective until dying. The higher level ELO/meta hasn't really changed even though brawling has been improved (probably from the SRM buff, but also people trying to figure out the half baked heat penalty system).

So, I dunno what to say really. Reasoned out arguments have been ignored by PGI often, so to assume they know what the negatives are is... laughable at best.

That was kind of my point. The more rational an argument the more chance it has of getting lost amongst the detritus of tantrums, rants and however if people do feel strongly about something they have a much better chance of the devs listening to them if they don't use insults or wave pitchforks. That is of course if it doesn't get buried by the ones holding the pitch forks.

[Windies]

Belorion, on 17 July 2013 - 10:49 AM, said:

Throwing an eTantrum does less for the game than not offering constructive criticism. Real issues get buried while inflammatory posts turn non-issues into issues that the dev team may have to deal with when it wasn't a real issue in the first place.

Take jump sniping for example. It was never a "problem" in that it was uncounterable. Its only problem was its FOTMiness. This problem would have most likely solved itself. However, now they have introduced a mechanic that makes pop-tarting harder to do. The people that were really good at it, can still do it. All they really did was counter the FOTMiness about poptarting. It was time, energy, and money spent on a task that would have corrected itself over time. When they could have been fixing real issues like the hit detection problem.

Another example is the real bug I submitted about the Heat System which quickly got burried under mountains of QQ threads about the new heat system. Anyone with two brain cells should realize that PGI will further flesh out the system as time goes on, and fix things like the LL ERLL loop hole. Their data will immediately point out that people are still using alphas with them. No complaining needed.

Yeah because PGI has done such an excellent job thus far of claiming to fix problem while not fixing problems and creating more problems in the interim.

I can't blame most of the feedback for being cynical and sarcastic at this point. How long have issue's persisted that have had solutions, and I mean well thought out and balanced solutions, created by the community that are just ignored while PGI implements utterly redundant and terrible systems to fix said issue's?

I would put more faith in this community to cobble together a better Mechwarrior game than I would ever put into PGI to do it. So pardon me if I'm a little harsh, sarcastic or cynical in my feedback towards them. I'm pretty sure they've earned most of it.

[Deathlike]

Belorion, on 17 July 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

And the forum goers have a much better chance of figuring it out?

Not really... it essentially would take someone writing an eloquent writeup on how things currently work in the game to explain what is happening and what's wrong with the picture.

The thing is, most of the complaints about LRMs for example are terribad. From experience, I know it's not as bad as people say it is... on the other hand I have been blown up by LRMs due to a confluence of other factors (UAV, being surrounded, etc.) it makes LRMs more effective than it normally would. Mind you, this is entirely subjective, but I have context to what I'm seeing happen. At the lower levels of play, most of the players at that level don't know any better... I would like to think players who think a certain behavior "is a problem" should try it out for themselves to understand the "other side of the issue". With experience, players will have to learn somehow how to play better... the problem that I see often is many players "rush to judgement" on issues that are truly non-issues. That is what most conversations these days happen to be.

There is no perfect solution... but reading into the context of most newbie posters, they need to actually try everything out before coming to the conclusion that "X stinks" or "Y is OP" or "Z is broken". That's just how most forums roll.

[Belorion]

Windies, on 17 July 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

I would put more faith in this community to cobble together a better Mechwarrior game than I would ever put into PGI to do it. So pardon me if I'm a little harsh, sarcastic or cynical in my feedback towards them. I'm pretty sure they've earned most of it.

A large number of the ideas I read on here from the "public" are quite simply terrible. If PGI were to implement any of these ideas the game would go down hill fast. As it is the game is pretty good. There are some areas that can use tweaking, but for the most part they are getting it right.

On the flip side, blooming reticules, poor weapon convergence, and many of the "wonderful" ideas that people on here have would make me quit playing MWO.

You could say I have no faith in the MWO community to do anything other than QQ.

A perfect example of this is the current state of 1 to 4 man drops within 8 v 8 or 12 v 12, and separate full man teams of 8 v 8 to be replaced by 12. Terrible idea. I said it was terrible when people proposed it. I said it was terrible when PGI said they were going to implement it, and I say its terrible now. A system thought up by the people on the boards not by PGI. I think the only reason they have left it in place is that the QQ before the change is less than the QQ after the change.

I have seen a lot of bad ideas tossed around on these boards that is more reminiscent of a group-think solution than any sort of step in a better direction. Issues that require minor tweaks don't need some radical new system that in the end no one will like.