483 replies to this topic

[Destructicus]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 10:08 PM, said:

I wasn't the one talking about Bioware, and I said that I wasn't at the town hall...

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

Nice deflection from the fact your arguments didn't pan out.

Edited by Destructicus, 12 August 2013 - 10:20 PM.

[The14th]

Destructicus, on 12 August 2013 - 10:11 PM, said:

Talking points are vague?
Sure thing kid...
The numbers are in the Googledocs link kid
967 individuals and over 5,000 people in collective groups.
Now go ahead and dismiss it just as PGI does.
You're just as bad as PGI when it comes to dismissing people

Yeah, I noticed the 5000 is padded by "representation". Seen better petitions in both size and content.

Wales Grey, on 12 August 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:

Appologies, it was that other guy, I'm sorry I gave you flak about



Wait, so basically you don't have a ******* clue what you're talking about? Thanks for playing "MWO Forums: Act Like You Know What You're Talking About Edition"!

If it was anything like the rest of the "game design" offered on the rest of the forums there was no need. Just about all the stuff that gets suggested is anti-fun, unfeasible, bad design, or a combination of the three.

[Erata]

GySgtMurphy, on 12 August 2013 - 10:18 PM, said:

Yes, they could do that, or, if you think about the physics involved, a Gauss rifle requires A LOT of power to drive the EM field in the barrel magnets. While the firing itself does not generate heat (low friction and no propellant waste heat to dissipate), charging the barrel magnets requires quite a bit of power, which is done via capacitor banks. Now, it would stand to reason that a mech pilot could choose to fire both the PPC's and the Gauss at the same time, but for sustained fire, power would have to shunted to one system or the other, as a finite amount power is available for charging the Gauss capacitors and the PPC particle excitement chamber (the "breech," if you will). So, desynching the Gauss firing and PPC firing would likely be a safety feature rather than a "nerf", as trying to draw more power than is available is NEVER, EVER, EVERRRRR a good idea.

So, yes, the devs are looking to remove the current "Whack-A-Mole" alpha build that has become popular, but as a player, I think that is a good thing, so that people have to choose which weapon to fire, instead of making easy crits on other players (like me), which makes for a more tactically involved battle. Keep complaining, and I will just get behind you with my Founders' Hunchback and core you with a few shots from my good ol' Kali-Yama 203mm AC, because complaining is what happens right before the former Cheesers' start dying!

If you really think about it, why haven't all these industrialized worlds just developed an arsenel of cruise missiles that could very easily home in on building-sized targets powered by nuclear devices???

We just want a fun video game!

[Archon Adam Steiner]

Wales Grey, on 12 August 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

Then refute arguments and don't make fallacious personal attacks. This is logic/rhetoric 101 stuff here.

The arguments have been refuted; numerous times. By myself, by others, by PGI. Those who advocate said arguments merely continue to adamantly yell that they are right, and that all others must be blind. They state that anyone of the opinion that the game is good, short of standard PvP balance issues that affect any game, are either '{Noble MechWarriors}' or simply poor benighted fools.

Asking for something other than melodramatic 'the sky is falling' postings is not attacking anything; it is suggesting the idea that taking exceedingly negative viewpoints is not likely to be successful or to be seen as anything other than complaining for sensationalism's sake.

[Wales Grey]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 10:21 PM, said:

If it was anything like the rest of the "game design" offered on the rest of the forums there was no need. Just about all the stuff that gets suggested is anti-fun, unfeasible, bad design, or a combination of the three.

[citation needed]

[The14th]

Wales Grey, on 12 August 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

Then refute arguments and don't make fallacious personal attacks. This is logic/rhetoric 101 stuff here.


So basically, the freeform element of a game has been claimed and dominated by groups of motivated people? Tell me how this wasn't an expected endgame from day one. How was it supposed to remain as some kind of "wild frontier" when people could claim turf and form teams?

So the designed endgame space of EVE being vastly less populated than the designed start zones isn't a problem to you? Yup, you definitely have no idea how game design works.

[Erata]

Arrachtas, on 12 August 2013 - 10:22 PM, said:

The arguments have been refuted; numerous times. By myself, by others, by PGI. Those who advocate said arguments merely continue to adamantly yell that they are right, and that all others must be blind. They state that anyone of the opinion that the game is good, short of standard PvP balance issues that affect any game, are either '{Noble MechWarriors}' or simply poor benighted fools.

Asking for something other than melodramatic 'the sky is falling' postings is not attacking anything; it is suggesting the idea that taking exceedingly negative viewpoints is not likely to be successful or to be seen as anything other than complaining for sensationalism's sake.

PGI has not officially refuted the arguments though, except with changes/patches that ignore the arguments entirely and provably do not fix things like weapon balance, or the monoculture of sniper meta that dominates the game.

Edited by Erata, 12 August 2013 - 10:24 PM.

[Destructicus]

GySgtMurphy, on 12 August 2013 - 10:18 PM, said:

Yes, they could do that, or, if you think about the physics involved, a Gauss rifle requires A LOT of power to drive the EM field in the barrel magnets. While the firing itself does not generate heat (low friction and no propellant waste heat to dissipate), charging the barrel magnets requires quite a bit of power, which is done via capacitor banks.

Your forget Battletech's rules were developed before said technology was a reality.
They created these things when they were as much fantasy as spells and Dragons

[GySgtMurphy]

Erata, on 12 August 2013 - 10:21 PM, said:

If you really think about it, why haven't all these industrialized worlds just developed an arsenel of cruise missiles that could very easily home in on building-sized targets powered by nuclear devices???

We just want a fun video game!

Tactical video games are fun video games!

[The14th]

Wales Grey, on 12 August 2013 - 10:23 PM, said:

[citation needed]

I cite anything by Shadowjaguar, and all the people who say he should be hired by PGI.

[Ardlen]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 10:08 PM, said:

I said that I wasn't at the town hall...

Fortunately, you do not have to remain uninformed. You can listen to the town hall or read more about it here: http://mwomercs.com/...l-1-discussion/

This should help everyone get on the same page.

Edited by Ardlen, 12 August 2013 - 10:25 PM.

[Wales Grey]

Arrachtas, on 12 August 2013 - 10:22 PM, said:

The arguments have been refuted; numerous times. By myself, by others, by PGI. Those who advocate said arguments merely continue to adamantly yell that they are right, and that all others must be blind. They state that anyone of the opinion that the game is good, short of standard PvP balance issues that affect any game, are either '{Noble MechWarriors}' or simply poor benighted fools.

Asking for something other than melodramatic 'the sky is falling' postings is not attacking anything; it is suggesting the idea that taking exceedingly negative viewpoints is not likely to be successful or to be seen as anything other than complaining for sensationalism's sake.

Okay then, tell me what the sam hell #swagheat scaling was supposed to fix? What purpose does this high-maintenance, high-complexity "fix" serve to do? How effective is it at its task?

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 10:23 PM, said:

So the designed endgame space of EVE being vastly less populated than the designed start zones isn't a problem to you? Yup, you definitely have no idea how game design works.

EVE has an endgame? Do you even know how EVE works? EVE isn't a themepark like WoW, there is literally no 'endgame'.

edit:
apparently EVE does have endgame content.

Quote

(02:32:17) saq: spying high level military ops that lead to titan kills is endgame content in eve

Edited by Wales Grey, 12 August 2013 - 10:29 PM.

[GySgtMurphy]

Destructicus, on 12 August 2013 - 10:24 PM, said:

Your forget Battletech's rules were developed before said technology was a reality.
They created these things when they were as much fantasy as spells and Dragons

Gauss and PPC theory was available in the 1980's, and from my own work on generator/power systems for my Engineering Senior Project, I have seen what happens when you try to draw more current than the genny can provide: you start to get lower and lower voltages in order to increase the current flow, which starts to have some nasty consequences over a long period of time.

[Solis Obscuri]

Thanks for the response. I'm not really sure what you mean by "a plan to de-sync the firing times of PPC and Gauss and keeping the Gauss as a primary long-range weapon". Sounds sort of like keeping Gauss as-is and tweaking PPCs more?

I'm also pleased to hear that a tutorial is in work and that hit-detection remains a high priority, as it's been hit-or-miss (no pun intended) the last few months. And that further quirks and de-nerfing the Awesome are priorities.

How do you intend to explain the new heat penalty system to new players, though? I've been playing over a year now (and have plenty of prior MW/BT experience) and I have some trouble trying to understand what builds/firing-sequences will penalize me and how much. The immediate internal damage on shutdown is also rather beastly, and I can only imagine how much worse for new players in SHS trial 'mechs. Are there any plans to soften (or remove) that feature once better weapons balance can be achieved? Also, have you even considered limiting the additional heat capacity from DHS to the same amount per HS as SHS? We were discussing that on the forums back in CB even, as a way of balancing out both technologies without SHS being hopelessly screwed, and it would have an impact of high-heat alpha builds without being so difficult to understand.

[Destructicus]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 10:21 PM, said:

Yeah, I noticed the 5000 is padded by "representation". Seen better petitions in both size and content.

If it was anything like the rest of the "game design" offered on the rest of the forums there was no need. Just about all the stuff that gets suggested is anti-fun, unfeasible, bad design, or a combination of the three.

So balance and bug squashing is antifun?
So are you just a cheap high alpha loving casual or what?
You got a lot of brown on your nose bud

[The14th]

Wales Grey, on 12 August 2013 - 10:26 PM, said:

Okay then, tell me what the sam hell #swagheat scaling was supposed to fix? What purpose does this high-maintenance, high-complexity "fix" serve to do? How effective is it at its task?


EVE has an endgame? Do you even know how EVE works?

edit:
apparently EVE does have endgame content.

Do you? I've been playing for almost 6 years and have been roving Southern Null for 4. The design of the game was for people to start out in High-sec, cut their teeth on PVP in war decs and Low-sec, then eventually live down in the wild tracts of Null. All the game mechanics were with the intention that most of the player base would live down there. The fact that you don't understand that just proves all the more that you have no idea how game design works.

Destructicus, on 12 August 2013 - 10:31 PM, said:

So balance and bug squashing is antifun?
So are you just a cheap high alpha loving casual or what?
You got a lot of brown on your nose bud

Where did I say that I love high-alpha or that the game is balanced? How about you actually bother to read.

Edited by The14th, 12 August 2013 - 10:34 PM.

[Destructicus]

GySgtMurphy, on 12 August 2013 - 10:29 PM, said:

Gauss and PPC theory was available in the 1980's, and from my own work on generator/power systems for my Engineering Senior Project, I have seen what happens when you try to draw more current than the genny can provide: you start to get lower and lower voltages in order to increase the current flow, which starts to have some nasty consequences over a long period of time.

"Theory" was available in the 80's
You think TT developing robot loving nerds were experts on it?
I understand suspension of belief only goes so far but still...

[MustrumRidcully]

Homeless Bill said:

Q: 2xPPC + 1xGauss?
A: "We have looked at what we can do with the build in question and have come up with a plan to de-sync the firing times of PPC and Gauss and keeping the Gauss as a primary long-range weapon."
Bill's Thoughts: What the hell? If this is just recycle time, it'll have no effect. But what it sounds like is "one of these weapons will no longer fire when you click." If that's the case, I'm absolutely dumbfounded. Quit making new, confusing systems!

It sounds to me like they just want to change the recycle time. And it will do very little indeed.

If it means a way to force chain-firing weapons...
Well, I support that idea, but then do it for all weapons across the board and you can ditch the heat scale. Don't add subsystem after subsystem after subsystem to overcomplicate your game. You'll regret that every time you find a new balance problem, every time you add a new item. Maintainance will be a b*tch.

[GySgtMurphy]

Can we NOT talk about EVE? This is a space reserved for Giant Fighting Robots, not space ships! (Robots rolls of the tongue better, and since this is MW, not BT, only Dropships please!)

Edited by GySgtMurphy, 12 August 2013 - 10:41 PM.

[Destructicus]

The14th, on 12 August 2013 - 10:33 PM, said:

Do you? I've been playing for almost 6 years and have been roving Southern Null for 4. The design of the game was for people to start out in High-sec, cut their teeth on PVP in war decs and Low-sec, then eventually live down in the wild tracts of Null. All the game mechanics were with the intention that most of the player base would live down there. The fact that you don't understand that just proves all the more that you have no idea how game design works.



Where did I say that I love high-alpha or that the game is balanced? How about you actually bother to read.

You said alot of our (the community's) suggestions are "antifun"
Like we really want to kill this game...