255 replies to this topic

[Chronojam]

Nobody get mad at people who want to play stompy robots with their mechbros, just because they're playing MW:LL instead of MWO. If we were all having the time of our lives with MWO right now #saveMWO wouldn't exist. MW:LL can grant a fresh perspective and be a fun new way to experience MechWarrior with your buddies without getting bogged down by this stuff.

[Lazy Eye]

MustrumRidcully, on 15 August 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

I think we need someone that actively finds weak spots in community ideas and arguments. I'm always that for all the ideas I don't like (f*ck hard point limitations), but I can't be sure I am good in doing it with stuff that I like. (Lower Cap, higher dissipation; ditch group-fire...) I think I am aware of some of the drawbacks and challenges, but I don't know if I miss some even more important, or underplay them.

But honestly, I think it's far worse for others.

It's about motivation. Is it about reaching a consensus or winning an argument? Is it about finding the best compromise or boosting your ego?


If you ever have doubts, ask yourself that question, answer it honestly, then proceed.


My experience has left me feeling that on the Internet most people only care about winning the argument (i.e. padding/stroking/protecting their ego); they don't care about right or wrong or how things impact on others ("I'm a GamingGod™! I don't have a problem, so it's clearly fine.")

This makes it hard to be objective, because we're hard-wired to go on the defensive when we meet people like that (ties in with our basic survival instincts). This lack of objectivity will cause us to then disregard what they say, even if it has merit, which causes a negative feedback loop...

My favourite example of this is when people dismiss me for playing "MathWarrior" on the forums... which is ironic, considering that the fundamental limits of computing that we live by today were discovered by mathematicians by 1936... 7 whole years before the construction of the first working computer... Or that mathematics has been shown to help solve real world problems.

I find it incredibly difficult to deal with this; if anyone has an answer to this (haha, yes, you're very, very witty, all those people who posted equivalents of "don't post on the forum"), please let me know.

[Erata]

Werewolf486, on 15 August 2013 - 11:02 AM, said:

Is this actually making any headway with PGI?

There have been a few honorable mentions, but to keep everything in perspective, they, the developers are still working on many aspects of the game, from CW to producing the bots in Phoenix Pack and new maps and trying to do balance passes. In other words: These things take time.

My guess, inferring from the old Penny Arcade article outlining the map balance and design process, could be taking a while to do some more exhaustive internal testing with de-synching PPCs/Gauss before outlining ways to respond in a tangible way to the town halls.

[Kraven Kor]

Chronojam, on 15 August 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

Nobody get mad at people who want to play stompy robots with their mechbros, just because they're playing MW:LL instead of MWO. If we were all having the time of our lives with MWO right now #saveMWO wouldn't exist. MW:LL can grant a fresh perspective and be a fun new way to experience MechWarrior with your buddies without getting bogged down by this stuff.

It can, however, also be seen as an ulterior motive.

That isn't necessarily what I think, but it could be what others see.

Particularly with the hub-bub some players made of MW:LL shutting down, and a certain small forum contingent who were, in the run up to that event, flooding these forums with "BUT MW:LL IS BETTER!"

For the record, there was at least one player flooding these forums with "BUT HAWKEN IS BETTER!" at one point.

Also for the Record: I @#$%ing hated MW:LL, but mostly due to the difficulty of getting anything to work when I tried it, and the general die-respawn-die gameplay.

[Lazy Eye]

Peekaboo I C JU, on 14 August 2013 - 11:32 PM, said:

I will not bash PGI...it is not a productive use of my mental resources...i made an argument on the forums a few months back that stated that this very thing would happen should they decide to try and "Balance" everything....they are losing long time fans in hordes and not gaining many new people at the same time...fans spend money because they love the franchise...especially if it is Cannon....others may spend a few here and there....but with the amount of hardcore fans PGI loses by listening to the less dedicated new players in regard to balance is not gonna make up for it...in the end...they lose...if newbs want balance set them up on a server where all mechs and all weapons are EXACTLY the same...see how long it lasts...i believe they will get bored really fast and stop playing....that is my educated opinion

I get your point that a lot of the arguments to do with balance come from people without experience of either other MechWarrior games or the TT (or at least, the ideas that seem to get adopted...)

I disagree that balance requires things to be "made the same" for people to realise it's there.

The TT had 3 types of weapon:

• Weapons that could shoot further and more accurately, but had accuracy penalties at close range and for their heat/weight did very little damage. (PPC, LRM, AC/2, AC/5).
  
• Weapons that had medium range that were accurate close up and did moderate amounts of damage for their heat/weight (Large Laser, AC/10).
  
• Weapons that had short ranges, but for their heat/weight do lots of damage compared to other weapons (SRM, Small and Medium Lasers, AC/20).

Not withstanding that some of these weapons had their issues (AC/2 and AC/5 well known; AC/20 less damage efficient than Medium Lasers or SRMs), they create balance through the way they can be used in combination:


A long-range 'mech paired with a short-range 'mech: The long range 'mech stands back and shoots the enemy at range and wears them down while the short-range 'mech acts as a deterent on the enemy closing.

This could be countered by different 'mech combinations: A pair of medium-range 'mechs: they move to medium range where combined they have more firepower than the enemy; if the enemy short-range 'mech moves to engage, the relative differences in firepower mean that it will be a "fair" fight, with gunnery skill probably deciding the outcome.

It could be countered by two close-range 'mechs. Yes, they'll take damage as they close and won't be able to fire back, but because of the relative weakness of the long range weapons, they can make up for it by putting out more damage more quickly than the opponents when they get into range.

And there's hundreds of different variations to this, just with the 3 weapon groups and 2 'mechs on either side.

This is the kind of balance I'm looking for: no matter what combination of weapons you've taken, if you know how to use them optimally, you'll always have a chance in a fight. Where ton-for-ton, 'mechs like the Shadow Hawk in it's stock configuration can be just as effective as an n-PPC + Gauss whatever.

The first step to achieving this is creating the differentiation between the different weapons. The second is to make sure players are aware that the choice is there and what that choice is. It really is that simple

[Stalkerr]

I do think that MWLL could be significantly improved in some areas, but thankfully a good many improvements can be made via server settings or client config file changes. Other changes, like cleaning up the HUD or addressing bugs, would be more involved.

It is not perfect by any means, but it is Mechwarrior.

[Nekki Basara]

Kraven Kor, on 15 August 2013 - 11:56 AM, said:

It can, however, also be seen as an ulterior motive.

That isn't necessarily what I think, but it could be what others see.

Particularly with the hub-bub some players made of MW:LL shutting down, and a certain small forum contingent who were, in the run up to that event, flooding these forums with "BUT MW:LL IS BETTER!"

For the record, there was at least one player flooding these forums with "BUT HAWKEN IS BETTER!" at one point.

Also for the Record: I @#$%ing hated MW:LL, but mostly due to the difficulty of getting anything to work when I tried it, and the general die-respawn-die gameplay.

You've got a point here. I bought into it while waiting for my chance at closed beta and it was painful as hell to play. The new user experience is utterly dire, and it just seemed clunky and wrong. MWO was so much better than it in almost every way.

But if things go the way the seem to be, it looks like my best chance to play internet robots with chill mekbros is MWLL, not MWO

[Big Giant Head]

I just hope that we can return what we lost with Closed Beta with Test Server

[Kraven Kor]

Nekki Basara, on 15 August 2013 - 12:18 PM, said:

You've got a point here. I bought into it while waiting for my chance at closed beta and it was painful as hell to play. The new user experience is utterly dire, and it just seemed clunky and wrong. MWO was so much better than it in almost every way.

But if things go the way the seem to be, it looks like my best chance to play internet robots with chill mekbros is MWLL, not MWO

Well, if the choice is "Cake or Death"... I'll have the Chicken?

[Miekael]

LakeDaemon, on 15 August 2013 - 07:53 AM, said:

incompetent, disinterested, deceptive, poorly lead, mwo is poorly developed ...

From a founders point of view, PGIs stance on things such as 3rd person, coolant flush, etc, give me reason enough that I consider PGI all of the above.

[The Justicar]

Anders, on 13 August 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

#saveMWO Community Town Hall #2

The discussioning thread

Thanks for all the effort, and the great discussions. Dear die-hard BT fans: don't stop shouting.

[N0MAD]

The only thing MWLL has that MWO doesnt is a Game lobby.. So what is it you should be pushing for?

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

As a long time listener and fan of NGNG ... here is my observation and opinion. (If you want the facts, ask them.)

NGNG ...
- tries to be positive and optimistic about the game
- has a few things they clearly don't like about the game, but they don't dwell on it, they believe the positives outweigh the negatives
- believes that the overall direction of the game is good, and that a "wait and see" approach is OK
- is supported by IGP, but not controlled by them
- has access to the developers because they have been communicating personally with them since closed beta (they were building these relationships before they got IGP's support)
- is willing to support anyone who mostly agrees with their outlook
- wants to foster a positive experience for everyone ... if you're overly negative or just trolling, they will marginalize, ignore or ban you (banning has only happened once that I know of)

If you want to arrange an interview, I would pick a specific topic for debate that, if addressed, would contribute to the community at large. Or, better yet, give them four or five topics to choose two or three from.

^ All my opinions ... from a fan of NGNG and a guy who does a lot of negotiating with people who have differing goals, opinions, or points of view in real life.

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 15 August 2013 - 04:08 PM.

[N0MAD]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 15 August 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

As a long time listener and fan of NGNG ... here is my observation and opinion. (If you want the facts, ask them.)
NGNG ...
- is supported by IGP, but not controlled by them
- has access to the developers because they have been communicating personally with them since closed beta (they were building these relationships before they got IGP's support)

I disagree, NGNG is a commercial venture, part of their revenue is derived from (MWO) PGI even if its not (or is) directly paid by PGI, and their interaction with the devs is based on the devs controlling what can and cannot be talked about when they have their cosy little chats.

[Chronojam]

N0MAD, on 15 August 2013 - 04:01 PM, said:

The only thing MWLL has that MWO doesnt is a Game lobby.. So what is it you should be pushing for?

It also has a crew of clergymen to exorcise any ghost mechanics.

[PeekaBoo I C Ju]

DOTSGEMINI, on 15 August 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

My educated opinion is that this is incredibly snobby, if there are no new players who dont spend money, who populates the servers then? I havent put a whole lot of money into this game, does that mean that I have less right to enjoy this game for what it is? An extremely niche game that needs as many people as it can get. In regards to hordes- do you have any stats? I know a lot of people are waiting till CW comes out, so they dont burn out before hand

I have been playing online games for 25+ years...and i have seen many franchises crumbles due to swinging the nerf hammer too hard..., so YES...it is an educated deduction, sorry if you do not agree, but it is true...this game is boring...i spend more time overheating than playing...i recently took 3 months off and haven't spent on this game in months because i do not like the direction the game is going.

MWO claims to be a thinking mans shooters, but they have taken all the thinking out of it by dumbing it down and nerfing everything, also had you read what i posted i suggested they make a second server to appease new players where every mech and every weapon is exactly the same...only cosmetic differences. nothing is more balanced than carbon copy mechs...it is a challenge to PGI...I do not expect you to understand that and i don't expect PGI to accept it..truthfully i have lost faith in PGI and it is the reason i believe this game is failing...don't like it?...don't read it...as far as responding it to it and snubbing it, it is not your place or your jobs....as far as calling me names about it?...your just a whiner with a attitude so why would it bother me?


I would also like to point out that MWO is bleeding founders like they were struck on the MWO jugular Vein, All because of bending over backwards for people who are either to stupid to use tactics or too lazy to learn something other than point and shoot...The founders made this game possible...PGI basically thumbed their noses at them in favor of less experienced players with penchant for QQ'ing....most are not spending because PGI swung the Nerf hammer, TOO HARD and TOO MANY times...i recently deleted a lot of mechs because of nerfs...they just are not viable any more, some of those had skins i paid real $$$ for....why would i keep dumping money into a place that does not appreciate my opinion?

Edited by Peekaboo I C JU, 15 August 2013 - 05:26 PM.

[DisasterMedic]

Peekaboo I C JU, on 15 August 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

:words:

Hard data on the number of purchased founders accounts versus the number of active founders accounts would be interesting.

[PeekaBoo I C Ju]

DisasterMedic, on 15 August 2013 - 08:19 PM, said:

Hard data on the number of purchased founders accounts versus the number of active founders accounts would be interesting.

ask a dev, I do know that a lot of the founders i knew when the game started are gone...however only the devs would know hard #'s...maybe if you ask nice they might enlighten you

[Deathz Jester]

I submitted my first ever question for ATD earlier, but as I pressed "Post" I remembered that hardly any of the questions get direct answers or picked for that matter, and I came to the grim realization that it will be overlooked most likely.

[Stormwolf]

I'm trying to get a more direct approach to talking with the Devs:

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2659703