Dimento Graven, on 20 November 2013 - 01:39 PM, said:
See, we're back to ultra denial from a Spider lover here. Why do I say that? Because he ignores the other sentence and then tries to apply faulty logic, based on the missing information he's ignoring. Let's look at the whole quote on hit boxes, and I'll do my best to interpret:
Atlas-
Atlas hit boxes were wrong, they had to realigned to match the visual.
They decided the CT was too big and the ST's were too small.
They added the 'thong'.
They believe their might be more issues.
Awesome-
They decided the head hit box was too big.
They decided the ST's were to small, and the CT too big.
They added the thong.
They decided the CT was too big.
Spider -
They found the hit box geometry was 'too complex', AND, that hit boxes weren't completely covering the components. The first part may not indicate a problem, the second part, definitely does.
They added the thong.
They decided the rear ST's were too small.
They decided the front CT was too small.
Orion-
PGI decided the head hit box was too big.
The thong was added.
They decided that the front CT was too big, that the ST's were too small.
In none of the other 'mechs do I see any indication that they'd found that the hit boxes were to small to completely cover the components.
The Spider, by far, sounds like hit had more work done to it. No other 'mech had geometry issues.
Except where they specifically mention that the hit box sizes needed to be increased to 'thoroughly cover' the components.
I'm sorry they didn't use the words, "broke" and "bug" and "we f'd up", but that's the world of spin we live in now.
I don't have to respond to your EVERY post in this thread, nor do I give a {Scrap} about "static" screen shots. Also, here's my response: You're analysis is wrong. Why: REASONS!
It's about the same level of response I got with full motion video posts.
Plus the fact that the appeared to me to be obvious ploys to hijack the thread from discussing the Spider's issues.
If you don't believe that most of the Spider advocates aren't denying an issue, then your comprehension is faulty, and if you don't think making statements to the effect, "Fix EVERYTHING ELSE FIRST, THEN, touch my Spider" doesn't SCREAM, "wanting to keep your broken Spider" to everyone else who has acknowledged and reasoned that there is an issue with Spiders, well, again... Comprehension.
To your first part, I present my pilot mech stats, for your viewing. These are current as of today.
If anything, I'm a Quickdraw pilot far before I'm a Spider pilot, seen as I elited spiders back when they where "a waste of mech", and thus before individual mech score keeping. However, since individual mech scoring, I can tell you I have not been piloting only a Spider. I can't even say that it's a favorite mech of mine. I do find it fun to pilot, but I have many other mechs I prefer to pilot over the Spider. (Spider is mostly for it's flying abilities, which is fun to fly through the air. Besides that, I have it intended as a spotting platform. Even you admit to owning a Spider, so I'd have to say fair is fair here.)
So, what you are telling me is, by your OWN interpritations:
Atlas:
Broken beyond belief and was ignoring damage as it'***** boxes wasn't matching it's visuals.
Awesome:
Broken and was dieing too fast.
Orion:
Was surviving with XL engines too much, so they gained unfair and "broken" advantages in extra free weight for weapons and heat sinks along with advantages in surviving...
Spider:
Was broken because they did the same thing to the Atlas as they also did to the Spider, so each must have been as equally broken. Even though I showed that there was a very minor problem with the hit boxes in the posts you never seemed to respond to... about how they were a few pixels too small, especially after the arms are destroyed...
Of course, if you read what my findings where, you would have noticed that I did point out a slight problem in the shoulder areas. However, you don't seem to wish to read posts that have even a slight opposition to your views. Also, simplified hit boxes means that the computers can more easily read them, making them work better. The enlarged CT and rear side torsos was only increased by 10%. On a mech that small, the 10% is probably the couple of pixels of room I was talking about, but I have not had the opportunity to test this yet, so I can no say what was done to the mech as of this time.
Reading a stat change and see it in effect are two very different things. Reading it to say something it might not be saying is another different thing as well.
"No other mech had geometry issues", doesn't it say in the Atlas something about making the hit boxes better match the physical visuals? Sounds like the same thing, though not as "bad" as the spider, as it needed a small increase.
So, once more you refute evidence because "I don't like it". Still shots not enough? DEAL WITH IT. It's proof still. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it any less valid. Just like the Cataphrat video. You didn't like it because it wasn't in the best quality, didn't have an opening and closing screen shots for ping, etc. So far, the only evidence you seem to want to look at has been your own videos and videos that only support your side. Everything else has been refuted for rather poor reasons.
As for our responses to your videos, we viewed them, some of us (myself) several times. We saw what happened, and how some of your shots you claimed hit didn't hit. We (I) also took those videos and tried to replicate them, some I succeeded in, others I did not. I found that several of your videos was correct, but seen as you stopped at the spider, you did not notice the same exact effect was happening on other mechs, namely the Jenner in my testings. So, yes, your videos showed a problem. Through other testing, it was a problem with more than just the Spiders. Your videos was not summarily refuted for no reason. We scientifically processed them, tested ourselves, and retested. We didn't toss them out of hand because "the quality was low". We actually viewed them. (PS: No, you don't have to respond to every post in this thread. Wouldn't want you to. However, you never even responded and has basically ignored my posts and my analysis, and your remarks here only reinforce the train of though that you probably didn't even look or read them over.)
Going once more to the "fix the problem that effects all mechs, than see if Spiders are still an issue" is not any sort of plea to keep a mech I hardly used "bugged", but really a plea to have it fixed correctly the first time. A lot of other people in this thread have seen what I mean. You seem to be the only one to read it in a different manner. I'll let my mech stats speak for me on this one again.
Quote
I've done testing, provided full motion video and found issues that, while minor to you, when combined with the other known issues with HSR, hit detection, etc., add up to a major problem with a particular chassis.
I ignore your posts on the Jenner because this is a Spider thread. Again, just like the 5 year old trying to get out of trouble by tattling on his sibling, the Spider lovers try and make an issue with another 'mech MORE of a priority. It was an obvious ploy I decided not to validate it by responding, but since you've made such an issue of it, there you go.
If you'd like to start a thread on Jenners, I'd be more than happy to join in on it and call for the problems to be fixed. However, as this is a thread on SPIDER issues, I choose to not let the conversation be hijacked for any significant duration.
OMG! OH MY F'ING GAWD! I ignore the facts that don't apply to the Spider, I don't give a rats butt about the Jenner in this thread. As far as my videos go, the ones I created and posted are WERE NO WHERE NEAR as old as you're trying to make them out to be. Hell the one I created in testing grounds is now only ONE patch old so I don't want EVER want you try that again.
And you wonder why I've started to ignore your posts.
I pointed out the issues with the movie. We don't know this person's ping at the time, we say a significant problem with the video stopping for a period of time, where we lose information at a CRITICAL analysis juncture (was the paper doll showing damage flash or not, we don't know, the video froze during that period), but yet again here we have that dissemination, "Oh, you can't fix Spider yet, there other bigger 'mechs that have problems, you gotta fix first before touching my Spider..."
Again, you want post that in a Cataphract specific thread calling fixes, by all means do so, BUT THIS AIN'T THE F'ING CATAPHRACT THREAD, STOP TRYING TO HIJACK IT...
Changes were made, I saw probably 50 percent less Spiders in game yesterday, based on that observation I surmise that some people are noticing the Spider is a bit less unreasonably hardy.
I believe that I agreed with you that there are many factors to the Spider, one of which could have been Hit box related. However, I felt that one couldn't determine which problem was the problem. If you read my posts, you would realize that I pointed out several factors with the Spider which is making it into a perfect storm of problems.
My posts on the Jenner are relevant to the discussion on the Spider, and thus relevant to the thread and the topic at hand. It was no ploy, it was something I discovered while testing other mechs for damage transference issues, something you yourself brought into the conversation as a "problem with the Spider". All I was trying to prove was that it wasn't just a problem with the Spider. In my investigation of other mechs, I discovered the transference problem in the Jenner as well, as well as stumbling upon the shoulder hole in the process. However, I could not replicate the "belly button hole" in the Spider from several patches back. (It is no hijacking the conversation when it naturally leads to it and remains relevant to the discussion.)
Your videos are accurate, but some (key word some) was old and showed problems solved a while ago. Other videos (most of them) were either inaccurately viewed (a miss was seen as a hit), we could not reproduce ourselves, or we could reproduce but on other mechs as well. It was not a problem with your videos and we (or at least I) did not refute them for no reason.
Once more, for the Cataphrat (not a video I created) shows the common complaint with the Spider on another mech. The discussion at the time was to prove that another mech was able to "shrug off damage, ignoring it like the Spider". It was very relevant to the conversation at the time. The discussion is still on what the problems are with the Spider, and what is not just a Spider issue. All the evidence that you feel is hijacking the thread was very relevant to the thread and its decision.
You may be correct about less people playing because the hit boxes may have been corrected, hopefully properly. At the same time it could be just generalized overreaction I've seen with with most other changes scaring people away from the mech. Much like with Ghost heat being announced, as now I see people chain firing their med lasers to "avoid the ghost heat" when they only have 3 or 4 of them... I can't say either way on this one.
Dimento Graven, on 20 November 2013 - 01:53 PM, said:
Don't be too harsh on them. The phone lines are owned by your local providers, however it's possible your power plant is owned by the local municipality (which typically charges a lot less than privately owned power companies as municipal power plants really only have to cover costs, not show ungodly amounts of profit to give to executives).
If your local ISP's aren't willing to invest in upgrading the infrastructure, it's not your local politician's fault, I'd blame the providers. There's {Scrap} tons of government subsidies for Telco improvement, crimany, every damn bill we're taxed for it, so why they won't do it, is beyond me.
You'd have to come here to Texas, I can't stand to endure Cali all that much, BUT, the kegerator's loaded, and I got a freezer full of frosted mugs!
The government could also force an upgrade, like what they did with TV being forced to be all digital by a certain date. Or with certain light bulbs no longer being able to be produced. They technically can force the issue, if they wanted to. Not to mention, most cable (utility, anything attached to the telephone poles) is normally a government run monopoly. (In my area, there is only one cable company and one "phone" company available.)
Oh, and for someone who was so determined to avoid conversation that would "hijack" the thread, you responded to this fairly quickly...
9
- I regularly practice evasion techniques by dropping in a 5d with just a tag, no weapons. Do I have to? no - I'm dropping under-tonnage when I do it, but I'm forcing myself to learn to dodge fire. As my sig states - beware the fury of a patient man. A patient spider pilot is a very dangerous spider pilot.
