71 replies to this topic

[Sheraf]

lockwoodx, on 12 September 2013 - 09:03 AM, said:

Matches are clearly determined by three factors.

1. The number of players using voice communication/sync dropping
2. The number of players abusing a meta/exploiting macros
3. The number of disconnected players.

You can claim you do fine all you want, the rest of us are working on these three major issues one /thread/post at a time until PGI can share a concise plan in detail spelling out their state of the address for MWO's future. At the moment they've lost so many customers, it would be commercial suicide to tell the casual public this is how the game is intended to be, and their silence is deafening.

Somehow you are speaking for everyone else?

Teamwork is always a big factor. Macro? I remeber those 6AC2 jagger with macro that shoot like machine gun don't usually live very well against someone who know what they are doing.

lockwoodx, on 12 September 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

Taking advantage of game mechanics is "exploiting" and while I respect the discretion of the managements decision, that's code for "we can't fix it so we'll just allow it". If you have any previous experience with inept MMO companies, allowing macros in a controlled competitive online environment should raise all sorts of red flags for you. I'm out for now so take care David. (On a side not this has to be one of most buggy forums I've ever experienced in over two decades. Soooo ghetto and slow not to mention how to auto-logs you out every other post.)

Taking advantage of the game mechanics is "exploiting"? So by flanking an enemy I'm exploiting? because they can't see me from the side, yeah right I'm taking advantage of that

Edited by Sheraf, 12 September 2013 - 09:17 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

lockwoodx, on 12 September 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

Taking advantage of game mechanics is "exploiting" and while I respect the discretion of the managements decision, that's code for "we can't fix it so we'll just allow it". If you have any previous experience with inept MMO companies, allowing macros in a controlled competitive online environment should raise all sorts of red flags for you. I'm out for now so take care David Joseph. (On a side not this has to be one of most buggy forums I've ever experienced in over two decades. Soooo ghetto and slow not to mention how to auto-logs you out every other post.)

Just so you know, I have a Macro capable mouse, I use no Macros and am fully comfortable with my enemies using them.

So I've gone from being an apologist to the underdog! A Step in the right direction!

[Sheraf]

My mouse is Logitech G700, it has macro too, but I don't use it, I like to click manually:)

[Kazly]

Team Leader, on 12 September 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

yes

As angry and strange as this was to read, I agree

Oh dear god that got me laughing.

[Mister Blastman]

Joseph Mallan, on 12 September 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

And you know this how? Since a Mech is basically a Man shaped tank? True Prone would be more accurate that standing, but would it be as accurate as single shot?

Accurate is relative.

My Steyr AUG will hit stuff @ 100 meters using a Eotech holo sight and might not necessarily hit right in the middle of the circle and dot (it won't... because anyone who shoots knows you adjust the sight for 50m which means you have to compensate by lifting your aim for bullet drop). However, if my shots land within 1.5 MO @ 100 yards... hell, even 200 yards... What's it matter? If I aim for center mass, the target is going to be dead and will all hit within 3 inches of each other. That's accurate enough!

In Mechwarrior terms, that means they'd all hit the same panel or possibly an adjacent one.

Now, if you're on the move and shoot... probably not. My UACs spread out more than not when moving. However, going back to a rifle, if you're firing every 1.25 to 1.5 seconds between trigger pulls, you're going to be hitting pretty darn close to where your first shot hit, every single consecutive time if you know what you're doing. Rifles are easy mode. My AUG might not be /quite/ as accurate as a M-16/AR-15, but it is accurate enough.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mister Blastman, on 12 September 2013 - 09:21 AM, said:

Accurate is relative.

My Steyr AUG will hit stuff @ 100 meters using a Eotech holo sight and might not necessarily hit right in the middle of the circle and dot (it won't... because anyone who shoots knows you adjust the sight for 50m which means you have to compensate by lifting your aim for bullet drop). However, if my shots land within 1.5 MO @ 100 yards... hell, even 200 yards... What's it matter? If I aim for center mass, the target is going to be dead and will all hit within 3 inches of each other. That's accurate enough!

In Mechwarrior terms, that means they'd all hit the same panel or possibly an adjacent one.

Now, if you're on the move and shoot... probably not. My UACs spread out more than not when moving. However, going back to a rifle, if you're firing every 1.25 to 1.5 seconds between trigger pulls, you're going to be hitting pretty darn close to where your first shot hit, every single consecutive time if you know what you're doing. Rifles are easy mode. My AUG might not be /quite/ as accurate as a M-16/AR-15, but it is accurate enough.

How will that hold up at 500M? Cause a 3 round burst will not hit anywhere near as tight as single shot. We are comparing Automatic fire to single shot not controlled rapid fire.

[MustrumRidcully]

lockwoodx, on 12 September 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

Taking advantage of game mechanics is "exploiting" and while I respect the discretion of the managements decision, that's code for "we can't fix it so we'll just allow it". If you have any previous experience with inept MMO companies, allowing macros in a controlled competitive online environment should raise all sorts of red flags for you. I'm out for now so take care David. (On a side not this has to be one of most buggy forums I've ever experienced in over two decades. Soooo ghetto and slow not to mention how to auto-logs you out every other post.)

How do competitive games stop the use of macros? It's just a finger press. You could even randomize timing, so it's impossible to prove.

The trick is to not have mechanics that rely on imperfect timing or context-less key presses. In Star Craft, skilled players seem to have insane click rates - but they are not just clicking on some button that always has the same place or repeating the press of a particular key in a fixed interval - they have to select units and buildings, move across the map. It requires interaction with what is shown on the screen and the overall game's state. You can probably cheat something like that, too - but that requires something that is equivalent of wallhacks or aimbots in shooter games.

[Mister Blastman]

Joseph Mallan, on 12 September 2013 - 09:30 AM, said:

How will that hold up at 500M? Cause a 3 round burst will not hit anywhere near as tight as single shot. We are comparing Automatic fire to single shot not controlled rapid fire.

A UAC 5 isn't automatic fire. It is sequential trigger pulls with occasional double-taps.

Automatic fire can put 10 rds downrange in 1 second. Maybe 5 at worst.

A UAC 5 can put 2. That isn't automatic. On a normal day, it puts 1 rd downrange every second+. We don't need a cone of fire in this game. There are better ways to solve the problem.

Also, you're not going to use 5.56 mm @ 500 yards. You'll let the guys with .308s take care of those targets. And the .308s don't use automatic fire.

[Migwelder]

The thing I don't understand is why they don't just change a single thing at a time and see how that affects the balance before deciding what to do next. They nerfed ppc's, tweaked gauss whilst also adding a whole new mechanic to it and decided to throw in a Uac5 buff which from what I could tell seemed to come out of nowhere.

Why do all these things at the same time? Why not bring in one change and evaluate for a few days, see how that change affects things then bring in more changes if needed. The PPC nerf seems to have been a good thing as I still see them used but not to the same degree as before. I think Gauss might have been a mechanic too far but time will tell. Before the changes mechs boating AC's were already very dangerous but the speed at which UAC5's tear through enemies with the lower jam rate is to me, ridiculous,

[Earl White]

If you believe the devs nerf weapons based on forum posts, you are sadly mistaken, they can use thousands of players data (yes data - objective facts, not opinions) to determine what is under or overperforming. Besides if someone "cries nerf" and then a few weeks later said weapon is nerfed, doesn't it perhaps suggest they were right about it?

Edited by Earl White, 12 September 2013 - 09:56 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mister Blastman, on 12 September 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

A UAC 5 isn't automatic fire. It is sequential trigger pulls with occasional double-taps.

Automatic fire can put 10 rds downrange in 1 second. Maybe 5 at worst.

A UAC 5 can put 2. That isn't automatic. On a normal day, it puts 1 rd downrange every second+. We don't need a cone of fire in this game. There are better ways to solve the problem.

Also, you're not going to use 5.56 mm @ 500 yards. You'll let the guys with .308s take care of those targets. And the .308s don't use automatic fire.

I beg to differ. My job was to kill people starting at 500M with an M-16... or a SAW (M249) both 5.56mm

[Mister Blastman]

Joseph Mallan, on 12 September 2013 - 09:56 AM, said:

I beg to differ. My job was to kill people starting at 500M with an M-16... or a SAW (M249) both 5.56mm

Then if that's the case you realize that a UAC 5 isn't a automatic weapon. Oh, and thank you for your service.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mister Blastman, on 12 September 2013 - 10:06 AM, said:

Then if that's the case you realize that a UAC 5 isn't a automatic weapon. Oh, and thank you for your service.

I wouldn't class it an Automatic weapon. But it is a Burst fire similar to the M-16 which could fire single and 3 round bursts at a flip of the switch.

[Malora Sidewinder]

MonkeyDCecil, on 12 September 2013 - 07:30 AM, said:

We should give our feed back about the game. But I think all this crying nerf is ruining the game. Because PGI listens to it and tries to fix it.

at this part your post lost all credibility with me.

[Kaldor]

MonkeyDCecil, on 12 September 2013 - 07:30 AM, said:

Man it seems to me that the community is crying nerf to much. Every time there is a new "meta" ( I hate that word) we cry nerf. So when is this going to stop, never it seems. Now people are crying nerf on the UAC/5. WTF people, the weapon is perfect.

Its the cheaters using macros that are ruining this weapon. Now I do not know if anything can be done about macros. I personal do not use them. They are cheating. It is no different then using a hack. It is a type of hack if you think about it.

OK, I am getting of topic here. We the community have cried nerf so much, we now have ghost heat and a stupid charge to the Gauss. So stupid. Now I know somethings really needed to be nerfed. Like the PPC/ERPPC and LRMs. But I want to point out the PPC/ERPPC did not need a nerf, tell they got their heat reduced and projectile speed increased. And why was that done, because we asked for it. Yeah that is right, we ask for the PPC/ERPPC to be bad ***. We got what we wanted and the we cried about it.

We should give our feed back about the game. But I think all this crying nerf is ruining the game. Because PGI listens to it and tries to fix it. But goes about it in a overly complicated way. So should PGI listen to us when we cry nerf? Yes and no, they should just take a look into it and make their own decision about it.

And lastly, STOP USING ******* MACROS. That is cheating. Why is it cheating because you are using a outside scrip to influence the game. That is cheating period.

Translation:
"My butt, it hurts"

[Wolfways]

lol when i read the tile i immediately thought

[Doomstryke]

macor's actually hurt dps most of the time to most weapons. Someone posted a nice movie about ultra 5s on macro vs not and how long it took to core a mech. Macro's made it lot worse..

Second something is only cheating if its not availble to everyone or is explicitly against the rules like aimbots.

everyone has access to macro's doesn't matter if its hardware based mouse +keyboard since software based macro's exist as well.

Your argument is like saying someone who gets 60 frames on maxed out settings is cheating because you POS rig gets 15 fps.

PGI says do it!! if you don't then your self imposing a handicap on yourself just like anyone who ******* about the meta's and doesn't use em. That is your self imposed problem, regardless of the argument that pgi needs to fix nerf or change things.

Edited by Doomstryke, 12 September 2013 - 11:39 AM.

[DeadlyNerd]

MnDragon, on 12 September 2013 - 08:09 AM, said:

If I may refer you to http://mwomercs.com/...wo-game-client/ you will find that your argument lacks basis in truth. The devs have said the following regarding the use of macros:

Q: My mouse/keyboard came with macro software that lets me emulate a series of clicks or helps me with some process. Is this allowed?

A: Yes, using macros as provided by 3rd party hardware vendors is allowed. Though the use of any modifications to assist with aiming, aimbots, wall hacks, or any attempt to give information or tactical assistance that other players would not have by default, is a serious violation of our Terms of Use and any account found to be using such software will likely be suspended or banned.

There is a difference between chaining key clicks for convenience and executing the whole gauss+PPC sync shot on 1 button.
One is convenience and the other is a cheat.

[Mystere]

lockwoodx, on 12 September 2013 - 08:52 AM, said:

A player using a trackball vs a mouse is at a disadvantage and that is a genuine L2P issue. A person using a macro vs having extra fingers or an extra set of eyeballs is an issue of cheating. I'm sorry so few can grasp the difference.

As per the rules specified by PGI, macros are specifically not forbidden. As such, those who keep on insisting that using them is a form of cheating must be really dense or something.

Besides, if you think using macros is cheating, then your head will explode when you find out that someone in here is using all of the following:

• Razer Hydra
  
• Silicon Micro Display ST1080 HMD
  
• NaturalPoint TrackIR
  
• Emotive EPOC Neuroheadset

DeadlyNerd, on 12 September 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

There is a difference between chaining key clicks for convenience and executing the whole gauss+PPC sync shot on 1 button.
One is convenience and the other is a cheat.

Dense is dense, because this sentence from PGI really says it all:

"Yes, using macros as provided by 3rd party hardware vendors is allowed."

Edited by Mystere, 12 September 2013 - 11:59 AM.

[Doomstryke]

Mouse + keyboard macro's usually are more limiting then the software ones. Make your life easy gauss on mouse button 2 ppc's on mouse button one. Hold then click, it's like shifting in a car takes bout 5 min to get used to then your fine.

Or get a software macro that says when you release key #1 press key #2. It's really not an issue...