260 replies to this topic

[ICEFANG13]

One of the biggest problems with it is that it does benefit the defender much more than the attacker, and this game mostly has defensive tools, making the defender have a larger advantage than the normal defender advantage that is usually there in everything. It makes games more stale and less dynamic. Unfortunately the aggressive tools are mostly out, although UAV is good, if Air Strike and Art was good (although I don't like the consumable concept at all as well), high damage and very obvious, it would be good for moving units which helps the attacker. That's one of the biggest problems of this game, and map design can circumvent this but all maps are not stellar for this.

[D Sync]

Seismic was extremely over powered at 450 M, now that they changed it to a more reasonable range I find it useful in all mechs.

[MaddMaxx]

Another stellar case of the Dev cannot win, ever.

In the CB, very many players were outraged there was no built in Active/Passive Radar system, or a f'ing rear view camera. They were all running around BLIND according to them. Boo Dev.

The appeasement came in the form of Seismic Sensor. It was already only running at HALF the range of the other Mech games range of 1000m. Yaah Dev.

Then the whining turned again. Better than radar, better than rear view and way to much Range @450m. The new whine was, can't sneak around, can't blind side those BIG Fatlas's like they liked to... blah blah blah.

The appeasement came in the form of Nerf Seismic Sensor. It was already only running at HALF the range of the other Mech games range of 1000m and now was down to 250m. Yaah Dev.

And now this. Put it in! Take it out! Nerf it. Buff it!

FFS would this Community please make up its F*ing mind already.

[Bacl]

Viktor Drake, on 02 August 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

You guys are all lame seriously. Obviously you all never used seismic and just whined and complained about it rather than using it to an advantage. Still the sad part is that each and everyone one of you benefited from it a some time or another due to someone on your team using it for Recon but are too stubborn to admit how useful it was to your team.

I do use seimic but not to recon but for protection, i have it on my LRM boat in case someone would have the brilliant idea of sneaking on me. I m stationnary so i dont create vibrations bothering the seismic sensor ( ok maybe when firing).
I'm not for the range nerf, at 400 meters it was fine but you have to be still for it too work.

Also scouting is supposed to be a dangerous role to play with risk of being shot at. Its one of the features that make this game stupid easy, third person view, seismic, UAV. What happened to" i turn the corner and OH ****!!!!!!! The whole team is there"..?

[Mechteric]

Sorry but this topic is totally backwards. Back when the seismic was 400m it was extremely difficult to be a stealthy recon mech because of how far away they could magically detect you. Seismic now remains a danger close tool that even recon mechs can use to let them known when to make a hasty U-turn.

[LauLiao]

Wow, 3 pages after a Necro. Impressive.

[DocBach]

Still think Beagle should have similar capabilities to Seismic, but be blockable by ECM so players who don't have tons of GXP can pay a tonnage penalty that can be countered if you can't afford a game changer like seismic, and it gives Beagle something to do besides counter ECM's missile block.

[MaddMaxx]

LauLiao, on 24 September 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

Wow, 3 pages after a Necro. Impressive.

No more impressive than the beat down they would have gotten, likely from you no doubt, for starting up a NEW thread about a long dead horse issue, right?

[kombatunit]

Sam Donelly, on 02 August 2013 - 12:07 PM, said:

Agreed, seismic should require you to be stationary to work at all.

Stationary sounds like a pretty good middle ground.

[Prezimonto]

MaddMaxx, on 24 September 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:

In the CB, very many players were outraged there was no built in Active/Passive Radar system, or a f'ing rear view camera.

So wait, explain to me again why seismic is the better solution instead of Active and Passive radar? How does this make for a better to tactical game with information warfare and active player skill being involved with finding the enemy?

[Khobai]

Seismic depreciates the role of scouting, so it should be removed from the game in its current form, or simply limited to being used by lights and mediums.

[Psikez]

Seismics still a thing? I gave up on moving it around ages ago, was impeding my battlesense. Slap it on for a league match or something but thats about it

[Almond Brown]

Prezimonto, on 24 September 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

So wait, explain to me again why seismic is the better solution instead of Active and Passive radar? How does this make for a better to tactical game with information warfare and active player skill being involved with finding the enemy?

I was not trying to explain better or not, just that without some form of knowing where the enemy was, especially behind, besides doing so visually, many folks thought MWO sucked balls because it was "HARD". So instead of a 1000m red dot radar system, they intro'd the Seismic module.

Some love it and some apparently hate it. When the vote is apparently even close to 50/50 (and not based on any vote taking in this disaster) it just gets tweaked to 250m (advanced) and stays in.

[MuKen]

MaddMaxx, on 24 September 2013 - 09:35 AM, said:

Another stellar case of the Dev cannot win, ever.

In the CB, very many players were outraged there was no built in Active/Passive Radar system, or a f'ing rear view camera. They were all running around BLIND according to them. Boo Dev.

Sure they can win. Implement an Active/Passive Radar system and a f'in rear view camera. "You ordered a cake, and I gave you a burger, and you're not happy. There's just no way to win with you!"

Edited by MuKen, 25 September 2013 - 09:42 AM.

[Almond Brown]

MuKen, on 25 September 2013 - 09:40 AM, said:

Sure they can win. Implement an Active/Passive Radar system and a f'in rear view camera. "You ordered a cake, and I gave you a burger, and you're not happy. There's just no way to win with you!"

That is what Seismic provides foo. And apparently no one likes it.

[MuKen]

Almond Brown, on 25 September 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

That is what Seismic provides foo. And apparently no one likes it.

That's a silly thing to say, people don't dislike it because it failed to touch those issues. People dislike it because it broke other game mechanics while doing so.

It's like if I said "I need more money" and you broke my leg by dropping a golden boulder on it, then said "hey, that's worth money, you got what you wanted". People don't want a rear view camera provided that comes with a game-breaking wall-hack, they just want a freakin rear-view camera. You can and should do one without the other.

Seismic tells you where people are behind walls, that's the problem. Why is this so hard to understand? Why do you guys keep acting like because people wanted rear-view, they should be ok with x-ray?

Edited by MuKen, 26 September 2013 - 10:19 PM.

[Orkhepaj]

Seismic bs should go. There is no sneaking up behind enemy line of mechs and instapopp one by one from the back due to this lame seismic back radar.

[MischiefSC]

Holding still, a mech with seismic should be able to detect other mechs by their size and speed.

Max range 500M, detects activity based on (tonnage/10) x KPH. For example, 100 tons at 50kph is detected at 500m. 100/10 = 10 x KPH50 = 500.

Make sense?

So a hunchback at 50 tons traveling at 80 KPH would be detected by a stationary mech with seismic at 400M. If he slowed down however the range to detect him drops to 200M at 40KPH.

Add to this self-generated static. Turning, the shuffling of your own mechs feet, reduces that range by your tonnage/10 as a %. So a hunchback who's turning in place but not moving is going to have his detection range reduced by 5%. When you move it's your tonnage + your speed/10 as a percentage. So a hunchback traveling at 50KPH would reduce his detection range by 55% while an Atlas traveling at any speed isn't going to detect anything until he stops.

What does this mean?

It means a Spider at 25 tons traveling at 20 KPH could get to within 50m of a stationary mech undetected. When he kicks the speed up though he's going to give away his location. It means smaller mechs can move faster while generating less 'static', giving an optimal buffer to them when being chased - larger mechs generate more 'static' and reduce their range more when they're moving.

It means that having a smaller mech and moving slowly would let you scout effectively against anything but a completely stationary opponent and moving very slowly in a small mech will still let you sneak to within backstabbing range if you're good and careful.

That would be ideal for me.

[Almond Brown]

MuKen, on 26 September 2013 - 10:16 PM, said:

That's a silly thing to say, people don't dislike it because it failed to touch those issues. People dislike it because it broke other game mechanics while doing so.

It's like if I said "I need more money" and you broke my leg by dropping a golden boulder on it, then said "hey, that's worth money, you got what you wanted". People don't want a rear view camera provided that comes with a game-breaking wall-hack, they just want a freakin rear-view camera. You can and should do one without the other.

Seismic tells you where people are behind walls, that's the problem. Why is this so hard to understand? Why do you guys keep acting like because people wanted rear-view, they should be ok with x-ray?

The previous Mech game version was a wall-hack as well. Getting pings from Active radar from an unseen enemy 1000m away, hello. Sure go passive, go active, whatever. either way at some point it was on and you got your Ping data.

The Dev mentioned the rear view was an Engine issue but are looking into it. In the meantime, you can know when an enemy is behind you. No need for people to be all irate it isn't a fracking actual camera, it provides the data required.

Edited by Almond Brown, 27 September 2013 - 11:11 AM.

[Livewyr]

Why is this thread still going on?