184 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

There's not a single multiplayer game in existence that hasn't had their own lrmageddon. Things make it past sometimes. Sometimes it's a QA issue, sometimes it's a human error, sometimes it's sloppy development issue, sometimes it's a poor management issue, and sometimes it's just simply those small testing groups weren't able to see what would happen once it went live and the min/max group got ahold of it.

Is this game perfect? Nah
Is it fun? Well for me it is, some will agree, others will disagree, it's purely subjective.

I really do think they take feedback but I also think when you throw in 100 duplicate posts on the same subject in which 90% of the posts are simply "you suck" or some such drivel and rhetoric it makes it really difficult to sift through to actual idea and constructive suggestions that are not only "good" but feasible, will work with future plans, and coincide with factual data that comes in.
Then you pile on to that the fact that the devs really are pretty active with communication (outside of these forums anyhow) and it really is a lengthy process. That's one of the main reasons I'm so harsh when I see thread number 8 on the front page on the exact same subject and the process has to start all over again.
I understand why that happens, but it makes things more difficult than it has to be. You have a handful of mods who have to sift through all of that and the hundreds of complaints, reports, duplicate threads, etc. on a volunteer basis and then expect fast turn around times. It's simply not going to happen

[Sephlock]

So what we need to do is get every single user to simultaneously post about Narc, and that will get their attention!

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2014 - 09:15 PM, said:

There's not a single multiplayer game in existence that hasn't had their own lrmageddon. Things make it past sometimes. Sometimes it's a QA issue, sometimes it's a human error, sometimes it's sloppy development issue, sometimes it's a poor management issue, and sometimes it's just simply those small testing groups weren't able to see what would happen once it went live and the min/max group got ahold of it.

Is this game perfect? Nah
Is it fun? Well for me it is, some will agree, others will disagree, it's purely subjective.

I really do think they take feedback but I also think when you throw in 100 duplicate posts on the same subject in which 90% of the posts are simply "you suck" or some such drivel and rhetoric it makes it really difficult to sift through to actual idea and constructive suggestions that are not only "good" but feasible, will work with future plans, and coincide with factual data that comes in.
Then you pile on to that the fact that the devs really are pretty active with communication (outside of these forums anyhow) and it really is a lengthy process. That's one of the main reasons I'm so harsh when I see thread number 8 on the front page on the exact same subject and the process has to start all over again.
I understand why that happens, but it makes things more difficult than it has to be. You have a handful of mods who have to sift through all of that and the hundreds of complaints, reports, duplicate threads, etc. on a volunteer basis and then expect fast turn around times. It's simply not going to happen

It's a little unfair when most of the info harvested has to be by the players... whereas it should be that PGI has someone they have working for them to do the deed.

It's virtually making your own mess and making everyone live in it. That's not actually productive or helpful.

Sephlock, on 17 January 2014 - 09:26 PM, said:

So what we need to do is get every single user to simultaneously post about Narc, and that will get their attention!

You could try, but noone complains about NARC. People complained about MGs to the high heavens. So... good luck with that.

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 17 January 2014 - 09:38 PM, said:

It's a little unfair when most of the info harvested has to be by the players... whereas it should be that PGI has someone they have working for them to do the deed.

It's virtually making your own mess and making everyone live in it. That's not actually productive or helpful.



You could try, but noone complains about NARC. People complained about MGs to the high heavens. So... good luck with that.

That's a bit disingenuous. I've seen several ideas that I helped get sculpted and seen many other players do the same. PGI listens but they don't rely solely on player input to shape and direct their game.I've seen just as many ideas that they implemented that went against the popular opinion

[Khobai]

Quote

There's not a single multiplayer game in existence that hasn't had their own lrmageddon.

MWO has had multiple lrmageddons though. Not just one. Most devs learn from their mistakes the first time.

[Sandpit]

Khobai, on 18 January 2014 - 09:15 AM, said:

MWO has had multiple lrmageddons though. Not just one. Most devs learn from their mistakes the first time.

Now that I can't argue with. I think that's exactly why it's better to start low and buff if need be instead of start big and nerf as need be. If something isn't very strong it's much easier to add a little to it without breaking things than it is to introduce something that is op and reduce it.

[Khobai]

Quote

Now that I can't argue with. I think that's exactly why it's better to start low and buff if need be instead of start big and nerf as need be. If something isn't very strong it's much easier to add a little to it without breaking things than it is to introduce something that is op and reduce it.

PGI doesnt do things logically.

1) pgi knew from the very start that clan tech was going to be in the game. But they didnt design the fundamentals of the game around clan tech. and now they have to massively nerf clan tech to add it to the game.

2) pgi doesnt do incremental balance changes. instead they do sweeping changes that completely swing the meta from one direction to another seemingly overnight.

3) pgi has a tendency to just give up if they cant get something right the first time. ecm is a prime example of this.

[Sandpit]

Khobai, on 18 January 2014 - 12:16 PM, said:

PGI doesnt do things logically.

1) pgi knew from the very start that clan tech was going to be in the game. But they didnt design the fundamentals of the game around clan tech. and now they have to massively nerf clan tech to add it to the game.

2) pgi doesnt do incremental balance changes. instead they do sweeping changes that completely swing the meta from one direction to another seemingly overnight.

3) pgi has a tendency to just give up if they cant get something right the first time. ecm is a prime example of this.

Now this I don't agree with but really has nothing to do with the topic

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 17 January 2014 - 11:32 PM, said:

That's a bit disingenuous. I've seen several ideas that I helped get sculpted and seen many other players do the same. PGI listens but they don't rely solely on player input to shape and direct their game.I've seen just as many ideas that they implemented that went against the popular opinion

I must've missed them then.

"Listens" is a subjective term, because it's like selective hearing and selective reading. It's fine if you go against the popular opinion AS look as it makes sense.

To this day, less than 3 LL or 3 LPL due to ghost heat still doesn't make sense to me.

Edited by Deathlike, 18 January 2014 - 04:53 PM.

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 18 January 2014 - 04:53 PM, said:

I must've missed them then.

"Listens" is a subjective term, because it's like selective hearing and selective reading. It's fine if you go against the popular opinion AS look as it makes sense.

To this day, less than 3 LL or 3 LPL due to ghost heat still doesn't make sense to me.

See to me it does make sense. There was an issue with alpha strikes from extreme boating. Ghost heat attacked that issue. You can still boat more than 3LL (I do it all the time) you just can't alpha strike with them. You have to chain fire and have a little fire discipline.
I honestly see far too many players thinking alpha strikes are the primary form of firing solutions as opposed to last-ditch efforts.
As far as PGI listening to players? Group limits. That's a huge one I can think of off the top of my head.

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 18 January 2014 - 05:44 PM, said:

See to me it does make sense. There was an issue with alpha strikes from extreme boating. Ghost heat attacked that issue. You can still boat more than 3LL (I do it all the time) you just can't alpha strike with them. You have to chain fire and have a little fire discipline.
I honestly see far too many players thinking alpha strikes are the primary form of firing solutions as opposed to last-ditch efforts.
As far as PGI listening to players? Group limits. That's a huge one I can think of off the top of my head.

TBH, 2 PPCs are more appealing than 2 LLs. 2 LLs are only preferable when tonnage and heat are a factor.

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 18 January 2014 - 06:40 PM, said:

TBH, 2 PPCs are more appealing than 2 LLs. 2 LLs are only preferable when tonnage and heat are a factor.

That's subjective to personal preference though. I prefer LLs over PPCs. The tonnage and heat are always a factor, that's why it's a trade-off.

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 18 January 2014 - 07:08 PM, said:

That's subjective to personal preference though. I prefer LLs over PPCs. The tonnage and heat are always a factor, that's why it's a trade-off.

Meh.

When I ran a 733P, I didn't bother considering LPL on it. It was tethered to LL due to ghost heat. PPCs and LL worked out. I'm sure I could've tried a PPC and LPL combo, but that would've been kinda pointless.

Edited by Deathlike, 18 January 2014 - 07:24 PM.

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 18 January 2014 - 07:24 PM, said:

Meh.

When I ran a 733P, I didn't bother considering LPL on it. It was tethered to LL due to ghost heat. PPCs and LL worked out. I'm sure I could've tried a PPC and LPL combo, but that would've been kinda pointless.

I've actually found a really good combo on one of my Bmasters that I like.
3LL and an AC10. I'm having pretty good success with it thus far. It's versatile and using the AC10 to snipe outside of the LL range gives me a little pop at long ranges while still being able to put down some pretty steady beam fire.

On a topical note, I'm going to try out that NARC Locust I posted next week. See how well it does under the current mechanics.

[DocBach]

Narc definitely needs a boost. It should be like when they tag sharks and can track them from across the world. When you get Narc'd you should be the shark that everyone can track.

MEGALODON

Edited by DocBach, 18 January 2014 - 08:37 PM.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

NARC ammo should be 2 shots per ton.
NARC should never wear off.
NARC should fire like the Gauss does.
NARC should negate ECM.

[Fut]

Bobdolemite, on 01 January 2014 - 05:04 PM, said:

TAG is a shiny red kill me laser pointer, and its worse the smaller the mech is (self tag is worthless with artemis since direct los already provides full buffs)

Wait.
Why is it worthless to use TAG and Artemis at the same time?
The two items' effects stack together as far as I can tell.

[Sandpit]

Fut, on 18 January 2014 - 11:01 PM, said:

Wait.
Why is it worthless to use TAG and Artemis at the same time?
The two items' effects stack together as far as I can tell.

I'm pretty sure I've seen the same info but don't ahve a citation for it

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 18 January 2014 - 11:06 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure I've seen the same info but don't ahve a citation for it

I thought it was actually NARC+Artemis.

It was in some patch notes or something.. or an explanation somewhere around the revamped "LRM arc" (the one where it was like DIVE DIVE DIVE).

Edit:
Found it - http://mwomercs.com/...23-21-may-2013/

Edited by Deathlike, 18 January 2014 - 11:30 PM.

[Sandpit]

thank you death