565 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Void Angel, on 02 December 2013 - 11:06 PM, said:

... PGI: "Hey, players, we've got some neat things on the horizon"

Most players: "Yay, that looks cool, but maybe we could use some clarification or change on [this subject?]"

The Professionally Dissatisfied: "WAAAAH, I hate you! I wanted something different! I wanted everything sooner! I hate your face! You should sell the rights to make this game to a REAL company! You're stupid, I hate your face! Insults! More Insults! INCOHERENT, WHINY RAAAAAAAAAGE!"

Question: Which one of these three parties is not a grown-up?

Ironically, it's the top/first option.

I remember "big things" in July.

Of course, all of these things were promised like a year ago, while we were in beta.

UI 2.0 is still an "alpha" and we're not in "beta" anymore. If we still were in beta... well, we're not, so the answer is clear.

[elde]

JDH4mm3r, on 02 December 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:

so i'll repeat: I'm DEAF as in require my eyes to read and communicate. That being said:

HOW do YOU expect ME to understand a single word without some sort of captioning or anything? I know there are some people willing to translate what you devs talk about but FFS, you are kinda NOT BEING FAIR to those with hearing impairments who actually require the need to READ and not listen since our ears don't exactly work like yours.

Even for the people with normal hearing, this is clearly a wrong way. I for one would much rather read about the new and planned stuff on MWO (or anywhere else), since I can do that on my own time and return back to a spot that was interesting. I don't need a video for the updates.

As for how they're easier and faster to do than the current reports... how is that possible? You open a web browser, head to the forum and write that one post. I don't buy it.

Please bring back the old montly technical and creative updates, and return to more frequent Ask the Devs Q&A. We need more information, not videos.

[NextGame]

Good updates.

I would prefer that things were much further along given how long we have been expecting UI2.0 & CW, but we are where we are. Hopefully PGI can step up the pace.

[Maverick Howell]

They built this game on a poor foundation and it cost them in time. but they've clearly been working thier @$$3$ off and continued expanding the game. everything they are talking about right now is awesome and i believe that they will be keeping to their deadlines from now on. Two things they haven't talked about and i think they pretty much left behind is collision and destructible environments. Those things are essential to the mechwarrior experience! though i may not be happy those have been put on the back burnner. I know for certain that things are going in the proper direction now! YAHOO! thanks PGI!

[Void Angel]

Being wrong, even culpably wrong, doesn't make one infantile. Being incoherently abusive and angry, on the other hand...

I also find it disingenuous and insulting to be told that the frothing, incoherent ragemonkeys who think their personal frustration excuses them from the rules of adult conversation and polite discourse are the ones "in the know." The very idea is, well... infantile.

Edited by Void Angel, 02 December 2013 - 11:57 PM.

[Monkey Lover]

new map looks great

[TOGSolid]

Quote

Current plans are to shift the regular forum updates to a video format which will hopefully be a little less time consuming as the current method of communication.

You have to be missing a few chromosomes to actually believe that videos are faster to do than just writing up a news post. Considering it's Ghost Heat Paul we're dealing with here though I guess it shouldn't be that surprising that he'd go about the hardest way possible to do things.

Quote

Well, when you've heard about those neat things just over the horizon over and over and over again for 18 months, it starts to ring a little hollow. Your hyperbole aside, people are justifiably astonished at the lack of progress. How many times do you have to be told that they've started hammering out the basics for CW before you stop believing it?

They've been stringing the community along the entire time acting like this stuff is "just around the corner" for ages now. Mechwarrior Online is making cold fusion look reasonable by comparison.

Edited by TOGSolid, 03 December 2013 - 12:00 AM.

[Void Angel]

Maverick Howell, on 02 December 2013 - 11:39 PM, said:

They built this game on a poor foundation and it cost them in time. but they've clearly been working thier @$$3$ off and continued expanding the game. everything they are talking about right now is awesome and i believe that they will be keeping to their deadlines from now on. Two things they haven't talked about and i think they pretty much left behind is collision and destructible environments. Those things are essential to the mechwarrior experience! though i may not be happy those have been put on the back burnner. I know for certain that things are going in the proper direction now! YAHOO! thanks PGI!

They have a relatively small dev team - witness the "we're hiring" ad on the web page. So if something goes wrong again that requires a lot of resources, they could fall behind again. It's important that we recognize why that happens instead of simply noting that it has and bursting into incandescent, crying rage. =)

[Kotzi]

A lot of text with little said.

[Karl Split]

Thanks for the info. Umm so I guess this means we'll have a buggy ui 2.0 forced on us as beta testers right? You guys been reading the history of microsoft or something?

[TOGSolid]

Void Angel, on 03 December 2013 - 12:02 AM, said:

They have a relatively small dev team - witness the "we're hiring" ad on the web page. So if something goes wrong again that requires a lot of resources, they could fall behind again. It's important that we recognize why that happens instead of simply noting that it has and bursting into incandescent, crying rage. =)

Yeah no. It's quite telling that both this game and Mechwarrior Tactics are suffering from very similar failures of leadership issues that have resulted in even the most simple of tasks requiring Herculean effort.

Edited by TOGSolid, 03 December 2013 - 12:17 AM.

[Void Angel]

You're begging a lot of questions there. Don't confuse ex cathedra pronouncements and false cause fallacies with good reasoning.

[Muffinator]

Niko Snow, on 02 December 2013 - 02:25 PM, said:

With each release we put on the Pubic Test Server

Uh yeah baby put that release on my pubic test server...

[YueFei]

Rather than making chassis/role specific modules give *rewards* for performing a role, give us chassis/role specific modules that facilitate performing that role. For example:

A scout module should allow limited through-terrain targeting, so you can keep tabs on enemies without exposing yourself to getting splattered.

A brawler module could include some kind of damage mitigation or damage reduction. Possibly a smoke shell drop to cover an advance.

A sniper module could be enhanced optics, much like the old heat vision which made it super easy to spot enemies in the distance.

A fire support module could be one in which direct-fired LRMs take a *very* high flight arc, and are true fire-and-forget weapons, which do not require maintaining a lock-on. This allows an LRM user to lock, fire, and then turn away from the enemy, so he can defensively pilot instead of face-tanking everything. The high arc rewards him for risking himself to the enemy's direct-fire weapons, allowing his missiles to arc over most enemy cover. Indirect-fired LRMs would retain the current flight arc and mechanics.

Note that if a scout module allows limited thru-terrain targeting (shorter ranged than within-LOS targeting), it synergizes with LRM fire support. The scout doesn't need to unduly expose himself to getting one-or-two-shotted by enemy heavies/assaults, but is still able to target the enemy so the LRM fire support can target and launch. The enemy can still stay safe from the LRMs by hugging cover, but it prevents them from moving away from that cover, keeping them pinned down. They can cross into the open and take the punishment if they deem it worthwhile to change to a new position. Or they can call in their own lights/mediums to find and chase off the enemy light that's locking them up.

[Tyr Gunn]

Idea! Lets stay on topic. That is, constructively and intelligently provide an argument as to why you think something is incomplete or poorly designed. Or your support for the features you like. Or, y'know, don't post anything at all.

Fact, all the silly, nonsense K-Town worthy posts merely drown out the intelligent arguments in favour of fixing what might actually need fixing. Translation, you're not helping your cause!

[Kurayami]

Oh noez - Star Citizen made some moneyz while we are failing! I know - lets use something of their arsenal! But no - not dev updates, not roadmaps, not management, not support, not lore writers nor clear info - i know what we need A VIDEO BLOG. FYI Wingmans Hangar is about everything - not just "this week we do" and clearly not something you can pull off (we have this neat idea but we are not telling you when or how it will be implemented)

Everything else - can you please just once honestly tell "sorry people - we need money like right now" instead of load of 2 years old garbage to cover things up ?
CW 1st stage is ready to code - seriously?
UI - alpha {Scrap} UI in "released" game?
Skirmish - as long as i remember since the earliest stages of cbt people asked for TDM. FINALY when we clearly dont have enough players for yet another separate queue PGI delivers. But oh wait - yet another game mode! Skirmish but with turrets and *gasp* respawn!
Glass effect.... because we clearly dont have enough graphical bugs and fps drops. Maybe should have dust off that fancy dx11 project instead?

Dont make me wrong - im absolutely happy since at least something at least somehow is done or be done or planned tbd but right now you people putting Activison to shame - even they failed to achieve this level of wrong. Seriously like everything that could be wrong while still somehow working out IS wrong.

[Strongpaw]

I broke rule # 1... I read the forums... WHY did I do that... &^%$&^%$^%$^&^%^&^%$^&^%$&^%$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Friggin...

*= Paul Quotes

*Current plans are to shift the regular forum updates to a video format which will hopefully be a little less time consuming as the current method of communication. Our first video is targeted for mid-December if everything works out as planned. Stay tuned for updates around that time.

The only issue I have here is (UPDATE YOUR FRONT PAGE WITH THIS!) iT'S STILL saying October update on the first page and it makes it look like you haven't done nothing in 2 months.

* UI 2.0: <All>

* Community Warfare: <All>

* Gameplay: <All>

Good to know and thank you for the update.

* BattleMechs: FIX THE FRIGGIN SPIDER HIT BOXES!!!! 1 WEEK AGO i stood in front of an immobile spider and put 6 ac 20 rounds into its torso saw the red glowing scorch marks where they hit on its torso and it was LIGHT ORANGE after the hits what sort of magic paint do you have coating those? 120 Damage on a spider and LIGHT ORANGE? REALLY?!?!?!??!?

* Clans:
Design has started to focus on Clan Tech. It is at this time that we must stress once again that we will not be bringing Clan Tech into the game as it was originally written. Game balance is going to take precedence over any values/behaviors found previously in other MechWarrior/BattleTech titles. Yes, there will be growing pains but we will make sure that Clan Tech does have a unique flavor when compared to InnerSphere Tech but not to the extent of everything just being over powered out of the gate.

iSSUES!!! BIG ISSUES WITH THIS!!!

Clan tech is clan tech for a reason. It presents a challenge! When a clan ER PPC is fired I expect 15 Damage and 15 heat. When i'm in an inner sphere mech facing that. I EXPECT it to be hard to fight against. I EXPECT it to be difficult to win against. If you want it to take longer for the weapons to 'recover' between shots I have no issue with that. If you give a Clan ER PPC 15dmg,15 Heat and a cool down of 5 or 5.5 seconds between shots instead of the IS ER PPC of 4 seconds i'm fine with that.

BUT making a CLAN ER PPC the same as an IS ER PPC and making it shoot rainbow beams *we will make sure that Clan Tech does have a unique flavor when compared to InnerSphere Tech. (end quote)
IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AND WONT BE TO MOST PILOTS.

* Currently on the hot-seat is a discussion as to how Clan BattleMechs will be customized. We will update everyone once the final call has been made and who knows, maybe one of the planned BattleMechs will be announced soon™!

EASY! You instituted the system of Hard Points when you built the game. Roll with it using the Lore of the clan Mechs. Short example Seperating the mechs by module sections Arm A, Arm B, Arm C. Center torso A Center Torso B ect. Now the implementation;

Lets take the Dire Wolf (Daishi) as out guinea pig

Right Arm Alpha would have 4 Energy and 1 Balistic slots ( RA-A ) 4 ER larges 1 Ultra ac5
Right Arm Beta would have 2 Balistic and 1 Energy ( RA-B ) 2 Ultra ac 2's, 1 ER PPC

SO instead of a mech you buy an Omni Chassis -Dire Wolf A : which comes with Right and Left arm A, Right and left torso A Center torso a, Head A, Right and Left Leg A

If you want Right Arm B on it you buy it and equip it like a module that changes the hard points.

If you want to change an engine then you have to buy a new Center Torso module with it and the new Hard Points in it if any.

An on and so forth.

Keep up the good work and keeps us informed, Thank you.


Strongpaw

Edited by Strongpaw, 03 December 2013 - 01:31 AM.

[Zomboyd]

Honestly with look at base locations i think a random base location/starting point for each team would be the way to go about it as it would force different tactics when you drop into a map depending on the location of your enemy's base and your base. This would make for a much more enjoyable experiance as it would stop each map the same old tactic gets played over again and again.

Honestly with look at base locations i think a random base location/starting point for each team would be the way to go about it as it would force different tactics when you drop into a map depending on the location of your enemy's base and your base. This would make for a much more enjoyable experience as it would stop each map the same old tactic gets played over again and again.

[Windsaw]

You know what I expected of Clan tech?

The clans are supposed to be the pinnacle of war, both technologically and when it comes to skill of the warriors.
I expected only the best players will have access to this technology.
I expeced whoever got the skill and motivation to use clan tech would be severely handicapped in numbers. In BT, only the clans who bartered for the lowest numbers of their forces got the right to enter battle. I expeced something like this here, which would mean they would be outnumbered 2:1 or 3:1. IMO an excellent way of balancing.

What is implied here essentially means two things:
- clan tech will be just a different kind of IS tech, just with a different kind of flavor. Bo-ring!
- PGI has finally given up any pretense that this is going to be a Battletech game. If the one essential revolution in the world of BT is essentially written away in all but name then there is hardly anything left.

[Snoopy]

Thanks for taking the time to give us any information / life sign at all.