2556 replies to this topic

[MonkeyCheese]

Wintersdark, on 29 September 2013 - 03:41 PM, said:

I don't like 3PV, and don't generally use it. I recognize it does grant an advantage when used as a scouting aid (and will occasionally use it as such) but I'm fine with it overall because:
1) It's implementing in a "realistic" fashion (seriously, stop with the "magical periscope" {Scrap}; there's a clear camera drone, this is no more high tech than a $20 remove control helicopter at 7-11).
2) It's objectively bad in combat. Sure, you can pop a camera out to scout, but when the **** hits the fan, 1PV is where you need to be to compete. That's all I need to enjoy the game.

I would only agree with that if the drone was 100% destoyable and wouldnt come back like the UAV. Otherwise it is magical.

[Literally]

Wintersdark, on 29 September 2013 - 03:41 PM, said:

Well, all this ranting and raving notwithstanding, I'll just chip in and say:

Communication? I'd always like more communication, but if there was none whatsoever, it wouldn't impact my enjoyment of the game, because my enjoyment of the game comes from the game, not the forums.

Thanks for popping in to give us a calmly written opinion, bro. I have to say I see where you're coming from, and I mostly agree with you. I think PGI would be doing better right now if they just didn't say anything at all most of the time - but I don't think that means communication does't impact our enjoyment of the game. The problem with PGI's communication is that they make promises and then don't keep them. For the entire time I've been here, they've consistently missed their own deadlines, and their own community manager posts passive-aggressive rants.
That's the communication problem.

Wintersdark, on 29 September 2013 - 03:41 PM, said:

Ghost heat? It's terrible. I hate it. *shrugs* But whatever, in my years of gaming (and being old enough to have played Battletech: The Crescent Hawks Inception while being old enough to drive, that's enough) I've never found a game where I approved of all the systems. Nevertheless, while Ghost Heat is problematic and causes a lot of collateral damage, it *DID* well and truly smash the meta that existed at the time. I still believe there are many better options, but whatever. This is what we have, and bad as it is, it doesn't wreck the game.

Like I said, I mostly agree with you, but I've gotta correct you on this one. Ghost Heat absolutely did NOT "well and truly smash the meta that existed at the time". The meta problem at the time was #2PPC1Gauss jumpsnipers. The counters to #2PPC1Gauss jumpsnipers were LLboat Stalkers, PPC Stalkers, and fast SRM brawlers. Ghost Heat made 3PPC1Gauss Highlanders switch to 2ERPPC1Gauss (which most good players had already done), did nothing to any other jumpsniper builds . . . and shut down LLboat Stalkers, PPC Stalkers, and fast 3SRM+ brawlers.
So Ghost Heat failed to weaken the #2PPC1Gauss jumpsniper meta, and then strengthened it by nerfing the counters to #2PPC1Gauss jumpsnipers.
The changes which mattered were JJ reticule shake (which reduced the jumpsniping some but didn't change #2PPC1Gauss) . . . and then PGI finally listened and changed the XML to nerf PPCs.

You don't have to approve of all the systems in a game. We gave up on that one a long time ago in MWO. But do keep the facts straight: Ghost Heat was months of wasted effort for something that hurt the game instead of improving it, when what we needed was an actual fix and progress before launch.

[Frenchtoastman]

dymlos2003, on 29 September 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

Sorry but you're wrong. I'm definitely not at a low level and wasn't one of those people. The funny thing you guys forget cause you don't play is the BRIGHT FLASHING drone above the heads of the mechs that give you away. Or how about how the camera zooms in when you get close facing a cliff or side. Oh... right

Many of the objects you can peek around and/or over are tall enough to obscure the blinking drone.

If you stand flush up against an object and the view zooms, you can simply take a step back and it zooms back out allowing you to periscope, likewise if you simply turn a little to one side. You can run right up against the boat in F-Colony, turn a little, and see around it all the way along the opposite side.

In the city maps (there's gonna be another one soon) the buildings are tall enough to hide the drone, but easy to see around or over using 3pv.

Edited by Frenchtoastman, 29 September 2013 - 05:40 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Literally, on 29 September 2013 - 04:41 PM, said:

Like I said, I mostly agree with you, but I've gotta correct you on this one. Ghost Heat absolutely did NOT "well and truly smash the meta that existed at the time". The meta problem at the time was #2PPC1Gauss jumpsnipers. The counters to #2PPC1Gauss jumpsnipers were LLboat Stalkers, PPC Stalkers, and fast SRM brawlers. Ghost Heat made 3PPC1Gauss Highlanders switch to 2ERPPC1Gauss (which most good players had already done), did nothing to any other jumpsniper builds . . . and shut down LLboat Stalkers, PPC Stalkers, and fast 3SRM+ brawlers.
So Ghost Heat failed to weaken the #2PPC1Gauss jumpsniper meta, and then strengthened it by nerfing the counters to #2PPC1Gauss jumpsnipers.
The changes which mattered were JJ reticule shake (which reduced the jumpsniping some but didn't change #2PPC1Gauss) . . . and then PGI finally listened and changed the XML to nerf PPCs.

You don't have to approve of all the systems in a game. We gave up on that one a long time ago in MWO. But do keep the facts straight: Ghost Heat was months of wasted effort for something that hurt the game instead of improving it, when what we needed was an actual fix and progress before launch.

I shouldn't have used the term "Meta" - I'm well aware of the problem you mention, but be aware it wasn't the central goal of Ghost Heat to address 2PPC/Gauss snipers. They wanted to reduce heavy frontloaded damage overall. Now, I'm not defending Ghost Heat here - as I said, I think it's terrible and doesn't work. But it DID really change how loadouts worked. For better or worse, well, that's very subjective. But it DID change them. Yes, other things stopped 2PPC/Gauss and would have without Ghost Heat, for that matter, but as I said, understand that Ghost Heat wasn't about stopping 2PPC/Gauss builds. Was it wasted time? In my opinion, yes, but whatever.

So, no, I don't need correcting. I fully understand - and understood then, as well - I was front and center in saying exactly the same things about Ghost Heat that you posted above. Anyways... It doesn't matter, for the purposes of this post. It's totally irrelevant.

Ghost heat is a ****** mechanic. If it never happened, though? We would NOT have CW now. Ghost Heat cost a designer some time coming up with the initial numbers, a coder a bit of time implementing it (Functionally, it's a fairly simply system, despite it's unintuitiveness and general badness) QA some time testing, and that's it. Yeah, probably around a month or so overall, but that's almost entirely eaten in testing, which would have happened alongside other testing.

If Ghost Heat didn't happen, we would NOT have had CW significantly earlier. CW is vastly more complex, and more importantly is gated almost entirely by UI2.0. Without UI2.0 functioning, many aspects of CW can only be prototyped at best, as Community Warfare is primarily a UI based feature. Maybe we'd have had UI2.0 a patch earlier, maybe CW a patch earlier as well - two weeks earlier, tops.
Basically, GH is a minor design change to how heat is generated, CW is essentially another game entirely that encapsulates the game we're already playing.

[DirePhoenix]

Wintersdark, on 29 September 2013 - 03:41 PM, said:

Well, all this ranting and raving notwithstanding, I'll just chip in and say:

I still have lots of fun in this game, and in fact I've had ever more fun since I started playing.

I don't like 3PV, and don't generally use it. I recognize it does grant an advantage when used as a scouting aid (and will occasionally use it as such) but I'm fine with it overall because:
1) It's implementing in a "realistic" fashion (seriously, stop with the "magical periscope" {Scrap}; there's a clear camera drone, this is no more high tech than a $20 remove control helicopter at 7-11).
2) It's objectively bad in combat. Sure, you can pop a camera out to scout, but when the **** hits the fan, 1PV is where you need to be to compete. That's all I need to enjoy the game.

The game has far, far fewer bugs than it used to. Less bugs - particularly less game breaking bugs - is always good in my books.

Ever more mechs. I know this doesn't apply to everyone, but for me? Mechs ARE content. Not counting my Phoenix and Saber mechs, I've got 26 so far, and I love them all.

Communication? I'd always like more communication, but if there was none whatsoever, it wouldn't impact my enjoyment of the game, because my enjoyment of the game comes from the game, not the forums.

Ghost heat? It's terrible. I hate it. *shrugs* But whatever, in my years of gaming (and being old enough to have played Battletech: The Crescent Hawks Inception while being old enough to drive, that's enough) I've never found a game where I approved of all the systems. Nevertheless, while Ghost Heat is problematic and causes a lot of collateral damage, it *DID* well and truly smash the meta that existed at the time. I still believe there are many better options, but whatever. This is what we have, and bad as it is, it doesn't wreck the game.

Lack of progress? What the hell is the point of complaining about that? Yeah, I'd like to see things progress faster. But do you seriously feel complaining about it will cause PGI to speed up? They're doing it as fast as they can - they know, as well as you and I - that CW is critical to long-term player retention and attraction. It'll happen when it happens.

So, yeah, whatever. I still certainly enjoy the game, and I'm still looking forward to Community Warfare, whenever it arrives. If it takes too long for me, and I get bored of the current game? I'll just go play something else for a couple months, then check back in a while.

And that's my two unasked for bits. Now, I'll clamber into a mech, and enjoy a couple drops.

I agree with most of your points. I too, am enjoying the game.

However, the 3PV isn't quite implemented in a way that makes sense in the universe. Sure a "drone" for an external camera might work, but this drone is indestructible (and just recently they even took off the weapon collision from it, so you can't even ineffectively shoot it). It needs to be affected by ECM and weapons fire. The camera viewpoint doesn't even quite match the location and movement of the 3D model of the drone (else people's view would be obscured by the lasers shooting the drones, and there would be a lot more bobbing up and down as the the mechs using it accelerate and decelerate).

Ghost Heat seems to be the wrong solution for the right problem. Sure, it does cut down the frequency boats squeeze off their group fire, but the issue is actually the pinpoint damage those alpha boats were doing, not the ability to boat. An actual solution for high damage pinpoint alphas would be to remove the ability to do pinpoint damage. All Ghost Heat does is make high damage group fire mildly annoying, in a mechanism that is even more frustrating to figure out or justify. So now instead of squeezing out a 4-PPC blast every 4 seconds, you might break it down into two 2-PPC blasts spaced out 0.5 seconds apart, but more than likely if you're a high damage boater, you'll probably just keep doing 4-PPC blasts, but maybe not every 4 seconds.

Is it frustrating that it doesn't work the way I think it should? Sure. But, I still enjoy playing the game.

[Nekki Basara]

Wintersdark, on 29 September 2013 - 05:40 PM, said:

Ghost heat is a ****** mechanic. If it never happened, though? We would NOT have CW now. Ghost Heat cost a designer some time coming up with the initial numbers, a coder a bit of time implementing it (Functionally, it's a fairly simply system, despite it's unintuitiveness and general badness) QA some time testing, and that's it. Yeah, probably around a month or so overall, but that's almost entirely eaten in testing, which would have happened alongside other testing.

We could have had lobbies though, a low-effort thing that the engine already supports and has code for.

[GalaxyBluestar]

Pihoqahiak, on 29 September 2013 - 02:08 AM, said:

some truths

yes the problem has been the stuburness and slow pace of pgi as they refuse to pull back on poor decisions and then cluster more ontop to try and even it out. i just wish you didn't make the "hold X weapons grouping over 2 to ghost heat ransom" idea, no other MW game needed it and by these guys using it for MWO it's an admittance that they screwed up a bunch of balance formulas and needed a bandaid to cover it up. problem is it's completely screwed over BT mechs and now you're forced forever more into the few optimised builds for competitaveness. those bad builds like 4ppc stalkers and so forth have been narrowed down even further in viability options, the tourney speaks for itself. only 1 lrm boat turned up because you gimp yourself relying on tag spotters etc when it's easier to take 2 ppc 2 ac's and let rip. that's all we got now. was 4LL and 4 LPL mechs OP? you suggested 2 ppc 2LL to be okay limits?

i agree it wasn't entirely your fault pgi just as usual went extreme but every time we get a balance pass like a game of guess who i'm just flicking down the loadout possibilities until one mech remains better than anyother combo and when that's nerfed i guess we won't bother with customising and go back to stock mechs as everything will be screwed down to the bottom denominator where we'll only be able to fire one weapon at a time. kinda like 10 secs a turn in battletech LOL

yeah i'm just rambling now such is the convoluted state things spiralling out of control.

[Frenchtoastman]

To anyone who says 3pv is fine/balanced because everyone has access to it, what if they don't? What if players were all tossed into matches where some could pop in and out of 3pv while others had to stay in 3pv and others, still, had to stay in 1pv..no one with any idea of that advantages of switching would call that balanced.

Now, think of the newbies that are stuck in 3pv until someone helps them figure out that there's another view mode.
Think about anyone who's staying in 1pv because they were told they wouldn't have to use 3pv..they do have to use 3pv if they want anything resembling an even playing field.

[Lysander Voidrunner]

SgtMaster, on 29 September 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

People are upset at the lack of progress because PGI spends resources on Ghost Heat + Shake + Inclination invisible walls...

If PGI would have taken easier and better ways to address these gameplay features,
we would already have UI 2.0 and phase 1-2 of CW by now... + more maps n mechs and king of the hill mode...

The way I see it is that it's not unfeasable that 3PV, Ghost Heat and Shake and Inclines were implemented by a small fraction of the team and the rest of it was doing something large and important that has yet to be implemented. An analogous idea would be the design of a team. You start everything at the same time in multiple teams, you put the majority of your engineering team on what makes the car run, and that takes longer to do. But while they are doing that, a few people can design the interior of the car and the shape of the steering wheel. It's also no big surprise that the steering wheel and interior are done much faster than the rest of the project.

TL:DR version.

Compartementalizing production leads to easier projects being done faster and not necessarily needing a large amount of people to do so all these complaints about 3PV, ghost heat etc don't necessarily mean that these took ressources away from the main project.

[Novakaine]

Navid A1, on 29 September 2013 - 05:31 AM, said:

people please...
don't whine about features... UI2?, CW?, new game modes?... forget about them. why your expectations are so high?

i'll be quite happy if the game had 4 maps, 4 mech types (like in CB) and nothing else (for real); IF the game could only run 3 matches without a hard freeze. I (try to) play 3 hours a day and it all turns out to me waiting for my mech to become available again from the client captivity after a hard freeze.
seriously, I wish the devs could just focus on the core of the game first and solve various memory leak bugs and then try to add content.

Really go play COD or BF2 seriously.
Don't begrudge those who want a bit more in a game.

[Ensaine]

Navid A1, on 29 September 2013 - 05:31 AM, said:

people please...
don't whine about features... UI2?, CW?, new game modes?... forget about them. why your expectations are so high?

i'll be quite happy if the game had 4 maps, 4 mech types (like in CB) and nothing else (for real); IF the game could only run 3 matches without a hard freeze. I (try to) play 3 hours a day and it all turns out to me waiting for my mech to become available again from the client captivity after a hard freeze.
seriously, I wish the devs could just focus on the core of the game first and solve various memory leak bugs and then try to add content.

Novakaine, on 29 September 2013 - 06:53 PM, said:

Really go play COD or BF2 seriously.
Don't begrudge those who want a bit more in a game.

Dude, you must have reading fail. He wants a game that doesn't freeze or crash.

[Pihoqahiak]

Mystere, on 29 September 2013 - 02:24 PM, said:

We interrupt the rehashing of 3PV discussions for this very important bulletin ...

As a gaming mechanic, 3PV does not offer any advantage for the very simple reason that everyone has fair access to it. But, it does offer an extremely significant psychological advantage against those who refuse to use it.

I agree, it's not an advantage in itself, for just that reason, everyone has access to it. For me, personally, it really detracts from the immersive experience of the game, which makes the game far less of an enjoyable experience for me. I use 3PV constantly in games like Warframe to looks over terrain and around corners, but the style of that game is intended to be much different than what Mechwarrior Online was initially advertised to be. I wouldn't have even been interested in Mechwarrior Online if it were advertised as a 3PV shooter 2 years ago.

Heffay, on 29 September 2013 - 02:36 PM, said:

Is it fair to say that people who complain incessantly about MWO are Hawken employees then?

Not necessarily, there are just too many better games out there to play to limit that comment to just Hawken, lol.

[Xtrekker]

Just took this a second ago. Yeah, no advantage whatsoever...



For full effect, http://postimg.org/i...jdf3wxqjl/full/.

Edited by Xtrekker, 29 September 2013 - 10:14 PM.

[Pihoqahiak]

SgtMaster, on 29 September 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

People are upset at the lack of progress because PGI spends resources on Ghost Heat + Shake + Inclination invisible walls...

If PGI would have taken easier and better ways to address these gameplay features,
we would already have UI 2.0 and phase 1-2 of CW by now... + more maps n mechs and king of the hill mode...

Your examples are a few of many that have shown to me that PGI development staff has made what appear to be rookie mistakes in their prioritizing of limited resources and execution of alpha and beta testing. Unfortunately, they don't seem to be learning from all these mistakes over the last 2 years and time after time make new rookie mistakes. It's hard to pinpoint the root cause though, lack of the ability to afford the needed expertise, inability to objectively see deficiencies, ego, poor choice of engine to have invested in, lack of needed experts that apply for the job openings? In all likely hood, a combination of most, if not all of those examples.

[Mystere]

Pihoqahiak, on 29 September 2013 - 09:43 PM, said:

I agree, it's not an advantage in itself, for just that reason, everyone has access to it. For me, personally, it really detracts from the immersive experience of the game, which makes the game far less of an enjoyable experience for me.

I have a more pragmatic view on 3PV. If I don't use it, then it does not break my immersion. I couldn't care less if others want to break theirs if that is their thing.

Now, if PGI makes their 3PV implementation much better (e.g drone is targetable/destructible, subject to interference, is a free module, etc.), them I will be encouraged to use it more.

Xtrekker, on 29 September 2013 - 09:58 PM, said:

Just took this a second ago. Yeah, no advantage whatsoever...

Your definition of "advantage" is very different from mine. Go check the first part of my earlier post if you haven't read it yet. As for the second part, that psychological advantage I mentioned might be a real issue though.

Edited by Mystere, 29 September 2013 - 10:05 PM.

[Xtrekker]

Mystere, on 29 September 2013 - 10:02 PM, said:

Your definition of "advantage" is very different from mine. Go check the first part of my earlier post if you haven't read it yet. As for the second part, that psychological advantage I mentioned might be a real issue though.

Dunno, could scout their entire team at no risk to myself, and let my team know the position of every mech. I don't use 3PV much at all, and rarely do I decide to actually run 3 displays in MWO, but the combination is pretty powerful (if you don't mind a little motion sickness). Unless I'm misunderstanding you of course.

[Mystere]

Xtrekker, on 29 September 2013 - 10:10 PM, said:

Dunno, could scout their entire team at no risk to myself, and let my team know the position of every mech. I don't use 3PV much at all, and rarely do I decide to actually run 3 displays in MWO, but the combination is pretty powerful (if you don't mind a little motion sickness). Unless I'm misunderstanding you of course.

Yes, you did misunderstand me. The "advantage" I speak of, or more specifically the lack of it, is that everyone has access to the game mechanic.

The fundamental issue though is that there are people who object to its very existence in the game. Needless to say, I am not one of those.

[Pihoqahiak]

GalaxyBluestar, on 29 September 2013 - 05:53 PM, said:

i agree it wasn't entirely your fault pgi just as usual went extreme but every time we get a balance pass like a game of guess who i'm just flicking down the loadout possibilities until one mech remains better than anyother combo and when that's nerfed i guess we won't bother with customising and go back to stock mechs as everything will be screwed down to the bottom denominator where we'll only be able to fire one weapon at a time. kinda like 10 secs a turn in battletech LOL

I probably could've worded my suggestion at the time a little better, but was just putting the generic idea out at the time in the discussion thread. I didn't even have the restriction of only two, or most likely even three of a weapon firing simultaneously needing the heat penalty applied to it in mind when at all. I was thinking more along the lines of four Large Laser/PPCs, and probably five or six Medium Lasers needing it applied. They also threw in the damage while over max heat threshold mechanic in there too, which I didn't expect or factor into my suggestion. A frustrating part of how things have played out during the beta testing with Mechwarrior Online is that they have been so hell bent on making a change as if it's the only and absolute best answer to all the problems to whatever issue they were trying to address, and being extremely resistant to acknowledge that it wasn't the best option after it gets played for a bit. I don't have problems in accepting better solutions that come along to the high alpha strike issues, and welcome them. People were brainstorming on the forums and that was a good thing. They could very well remove ghost heat and implement something better in the future, but they really missed their opportunity to test options out in a less disruptive environment for the players than what will likely happen in the future. I don't like that they just plain raise heat on the high heat weapons though. It punishes reasonable builds just as harshly as the problem builds, which leads to just what you mention, less variety of viable builds, which is never a good thing for a game.

[Pihoqahiak]

Mystere, on 29 September 2013 - 10:02 PM, said:

I have a more pragmatic view on 3PV. If I don't use it, then it does not break my immersion. I couldn't care less if others want to break theirs if that is their thing.

Unfortunately, your decision to not break your immersion will put you (and very importantly, your team) at a disadvantage to those that will use the benefits of 3PV against you. Admittedly, not necessarily a huge issue in casual game play, but much more so in a competitive environment like Community Warfare and tournaments.

[GalaxyBluestar]

@Pihoqahiak

true, the problem is we need mechanics that creates level viability amongst many loadouts, boats are no stranger to BT, like many have said awesomes keep suffering with these game balances, they were the only assault not used in the launch tourney! and other boats will suffer if there isn't a mechanic that lets the same weapon mechs perform at the same level as mixed builds. so far we've seen boats wrecked havoc and nerfs have followed now "duo" builds are the FOTM and there's hardley any boats around, they've been rendered too inefficient.

many say it's convergence others say heat mechanics are wrong, truth at the moment is that not enough mechanics are right to balance stock to custom - multiple to minmax builds. failing Homeless bill's idea a more basic idea from some smart people are looking into it ----> Intelligent Hitboxes - The Return

it's worth considering!

Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 29 September 2013 - 10:35 PM.