437 replies to this topic

[MaddMaxx]

Malavai Fletcher, on 28 November 2011 - 12:05 PM, said:

In mechlab-shadowcat boating 5 CLRM 10 packs,9 tonnes of reflective armour and jj still has 5 tonnes of weight spare.

Maddog boating 4 CLRM 20 packs plus extra ton of ammo in each pack,ECM,9.5 tonnes of reflective armour still has 6 tonnes of weight spare.

Both have the spare weight to accomdate Tc according to your figures.

The problem is not boating,its the lack of tactical imagination to battle the boats.

I find it interesting both are LRM Boats. If you added the TC that would pretty much fill the space though right?

At what speed do those run? How would they defend themselves say if a another medium, or a Light, got up nice and close.

[Haeso]

Tyrant, on 29 November 2011 - 08:02 AM, said:

No more need to argue this. You have pretty much made my point: its down to the pilots ability to deal with an alpha strike from another mech.

You can only dodge an alpha strike when you aren't facing them, and even then in only certain mechs. This also assumes they don't just opt for legging your ***. MW4 you could black one leg then keep hitting it to cause death, didn't have to take out both legs. Unless you know how to twist your torso to cover your legs... In which case do tell.

Quote

The same principle, why add RnG system when the last 2 games dint have those mechanics?
Especially when this game will be played primarily by those who liked the previous games?

You assume this is Mechwarrior not a battletech game. "Not your Father's MechWarrior" and more than one mention of simulation over arcade suggests this game's going to have a bit more depth. Preferably like MW2 without the technical limitations and a meta-game.

You also assume the playerbase will be comprised of mostly what, MW4 players? Where did you acquire the numbers for this assertion?

Quote

The skill in MW4 is not to hit the same location every time, everyone was able to do that eventually, the actual skill in MW4 was to not allow the other guys to hit you in the same location every time. But I assume you knew that already.

Which wasn't possible if they went for the legs/you wanted to shoot back at them. Which is why I didn't use Gauss or PPC and legged people that tried using their arm as a shield. Can't protect the legs. At least it took more than just blacking a leg unlike MW3.

Quote

Did you even read what I said?

Did you read what you said?

Quote

RnG is a graceless of acceptable randomization, good examples of this are starcraft and League of Legends, past a certain point the system takes all the power out of the players hands creating an abstract.

I was doing my best to respond to a statement that with my understanding of english was borderline gibberish, and even worded my reply as such - in that I said.

Quote

Please tell me that's not what you meant

Because I was guessing since it made no sense.

Quote

SC and LoL are good example because they are so extremely light on random mechanics, they are e-sports in every respect. WoT on the other hand is much more based on system dice rolls.

LoL is more of an E-sport because of it's playerbase than it's skill ceiling.

Comparing WoT to any game is comparing a **** to something else, it's not going to fare well. A side note: MW4 didn't sell well at all by the way.

Quote

We all want a tactical game where every mech has a role, however what some of us dont want is a game where we have failed to hit what the reticule is over simply bacuse a system rolled badly.

Its much better to design out the ability to 2 shot another mech rather than implement an RnD system that will miss some of the time.

No, it's really not, because it creates the exact same situation except it takes longer and arbitrarily weakens ranged weapons unless you compensate by increasing range or decreasing movement speed.

Without replacing the entire hitbox system with something new, you cannot have pinpoint accuracy in a 'Mech game. The game was purposefully designed with damage across multiple areas, or using a TC, less firepower and less chance of hitting overall*, the ability to target one specific area.


And if you're going to replace the damage model... you'd need to rebalance all the chassis and weapons, quite frankly you might as well call the game MechAssault Online at that point so I can stop hoping for a game I'll enjoy for more than a week.

*iirc.

Edited by Haeso, 29 November 2011 - 08:33 AM.

[Malavai Fletcher]

MaddMaxx, on 29 November 2011 - 08:24 AM, said:

I find it interesting both are LRM Boats. If you added the TC that would pretty much fill the space though right?

At what speed do those run? How would they defend themselves say if a another medium, or a Light, got up nice and close.

Scats speed is 87kph,maddogs speed is 70kph,the left over tonnage is the exact amount needed for TC's.

They wouldn't need to defend themselves,thats what your team are for.

But push come to shove both can fight and retreat easily,maddog twists 180 keeping enemy in crosshairs and moves away at full speed,scat moves away with full torso twist left,looking left out the cockpit so he can get lock while retreating.

[MaddMaxx]

Malavai Fletcher, on 29 November 2011 - 10:12 AM, said:

Scats speed is 87kph,maddogs speed is 70kph,the left over tonnage is the exact amount needed for TC's.

They wouldn't need to defend themselves,thats what your team are for.

But push come to shove both can fight and retreat easily,maddog twists 180 keeping enemy in crosshairs and moves away at full speed,scat moves away with full torso twist left,looking left out the cockpit so he can get lock while retreating.

Cool. Thanks. So the TC's would remove what otherwise may have been further Medium or Short ranged firepower?

[Dlardrageth]

Tyrant, on 29 November 2011 - 08:02 AM, said:

[...]
The same principle, why add RnG system when the last 2 games dint have those mechanics?
Especially when this game will be played primarily by those who liked the previous games?
[...]

Say what? You are aware of the general timeline? How far those "previous games" go back? And stating this game will primarily played by those "liking" the two previous ones is nothing but a wild-donkey-guess of yours. Seriously, how would you even start to prove that? I'm seriously tempted to add a "Proof or shut the F*** up!" at this point. This assumption of yours about the eventual future player base is just silly.

By the same reasoning one could argue that MW4 was actually a pretty crappy game (but it was BattleTech-based at least), more so in multiplayer due to its inherent flaws. And noone in his right mind looking forward to MWO will want it to become anything like MW4. And this statement is about as relevant and proveable as yours quoted above. And about as lacking any merit for a serious discussion as yours.

Edited by Dlardrageth, 29 November 2011 - 10:44 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Haeso, on 29 November 2011 - 08:32 AM, said:

You can only dodge an alpha strike when you aren't facing them, and even then in only certain mechs. This also assumes they don't just opt for legging your ***. MW4 you could black one leg then keep hitting it to cause death, didn't have to take out both legs. Unless you know how to twist your torso to cover your legs... In which case do tell.



You assume this is Mechwarrior not a battletech game. "Not your Father's MechWarrior" and more than one mention of simulation over arcade suggests this game's going to have a bit more depth. Preferably like MW2 without the technical limitations and a meta-game.

You also assume the playerbase will be comprised of mostly what, MW4 players? Where did you acquire the numbers for this assertion?


Which wasn't possible if they went for the legs/you wanted to shoot back at them. Which is why I didn't use Gauss or PPC and legged people that tried using their arm as a shield. Can't protect the legs. At least it took more than just blacking a leg unlike MW3.

Last i checked the Game was called Mechwarrior Online, Not Battletech Online, that in itself is a pretty good indication of where the direction is going, Mechwarrior is possibly the better known side of the franchise (sadly).
For the record shielding one leg against cover and turning your mech to suit the rotation is hardly rocket science, not all the players were Assault vertical jumping noobs, it is quite dangerous to assume such.
However in the case of hill popping, if your legs are getting hit in the first place your doing it wrong.

Dlardrageth, on 29 November 2011 - 10:42 AM, said:

Say what? You are aware of the general timeline? How far those "previous games" go back? And stating this game will primarily played by those "liking" the two previous ones is nothing but a wild-donkey-guess of yours. Seriously, how would you even start to prove that? I'm seriously tempted to add a "Proof or shut the F*** up!" at this point. This assumption of yours about the eventual future player base is just silly.

By the same reasoning one could argue that MW4 was actually a pretty crappy game (but it was BattleTech-based at least), more so in multiplayer due to its inherent flaws. And noone in his right mind looking forward to MWO will want it to become anything like MW4. And this statement is about as relevant and proveable as yours quoted above. And about as lacking any merit for a serious discussion as yours.

Actually its not, the vast majority of the player base will come from people who have played Mechwarrior Games since creation, along with those fans of the TT, the smallest portion of the player base will be the completely new to the universe crowd, its not talking **** its simple fact, to dispute it is rather odd. Do you really think this game is going to draw in more new players than old?

Edited by DV^McKenna, 29 November 2011 - 10:56 AM.

[Haeso]

DV^McKenna, on 29 November 2011 - 10:51 AM, said:

Last i checked the Game was called Mechwarrior Online, Not Battletech Online, that in itself is a pretty good indication of where the direction is going, Mechwarrior is possibly the better known side of the franchise (sadly).

And the quote I used should explain it will not be like the previous incarnations of MechWarrior. I'm not sure how else to read it. It will have similarities to be certain, but very much it's own game. Whereas aside from 4, all the MechWarrior games were fairly close to each other though progressing in their own way game design and technology wise. 4 was a large departure the series and only moderately more popular as I understand it, around 50% more sales? Given this and given that it was released years later, I'd question if those sales figures were a net gain relative to the population with access to gaming PCs.

Quote

For the record shielding one leg against cover and turning your mech to suit the rotation is hardly rocket science, not all the players were Assault vertical jumping noobs, it is quite dangerous to assume such.

If you're using cover, you're poptarting, if you're poptarting and winning the people you're playing against suck. I suppose light on the heat sink laser boats could use it to cool off, same principle as poptarting though.

An exception might be when the crest of the hill/mech choice allows you to fire without revealing legs, in which case they'd be aiming CT anyway, no?

Quote

Actually its not, the vast majority of the player base will come from people who have played Mechwarrior Games since creation, along with those fans of the TT, the smallest portion of the player base will be the completely new to the universe crowd, its not talking **** its simple fact, to dispute it is rather odd. Do you really think this game is going to draw in more new players than old?

Everyone making claims like these: Is there any data to support people preferring MW4 to say, Mw2/mw3, from every poll I've seen MW2/3 are usually more popular but I'm tired and my memory is fuzzy, maybe I'm wrong? I don't think I am. the only real advantage of mw4 was the multiplayer support. MW2 multiplayer wasn't even native at the start, and was laggy as hell usually, MW3 was native but laggy as hell, mw4 was the first mostly playable multiplayer and that had to do solely with the technology available not with the game design choices.

I'd say fans of earlier MW/TT outnumber fans of MW4, and they've already stated this isn't a game like say, MechAssault, so working under the assumption that it's not for those people... I'm not sure what you're getting at. Yes the established playerbase is where most of the game's initial players will come from, and if the game is successful it will grow from there, from what I can guess, older MW/Tabletop is what most people in that group prefer.

[Tyrant]

Haeso, on 29 November 2011 - 08:32 AM, said:

You can only dodge an alpha strike when you aren't facing them, and even then in only certain mechs. This also assumes they don't just opt for legging your ***. MW4 you could black one leg then keep hitting it to cause death, didn't have to take out both legs. Unless you know how to twist your torso to cover your legs... In which case do tell.

Pop faster, dont get hit.

Haeso, on 29 November 2011 - 08:32 AM, said:

You assume this is Mechwarrior not a battletech game. "Not your Father's MechWarrior" and more than one mention of simulation over arcade suggests this game's going to have a bit more depth. Preferably like MW2 without the technical limitations and a meta-game.

You also assume the playerbase will be comprised of mostly what, MW4 players? Where did you acquire the numbers for this assertion?

My assumptions are based on looking at the situation from Dev;s side:

If the devs develop a niche simulator what are the chances that MW2 fans will play, MW3, MW4? What about non-MW fans? What are the chances of these people giving them money? Their wallets will direct the design to something more akin to today's games, and they will opt for the safer bet.

Haeso, on 29 November 2011 - 08:32 AM, said:

Which wasn't possible if they went for the legs/you wanted to shoot back at them. Which is why I didn't use Gauss or PPC and legged people that tried using their arm as a shield. Can't protect the legs. At least it took more than just blacking a leg unlike MW3.

Pop faster, why are your legs exposed when you pop? Thought you were good at this game.

Haeso, on 29 November 2011 - 08:32 AM, said:

Comparing WoT to any game is comparing a **** to something else, it's not going to fare well. A side note: MW4 didn't sell well at all by the way.

I am happy you think that way. From all of the information released I would have to say they are going for the same monetization model and the same people who play and pay for WoT but prefer mechs over tanks. A wild guess, they dont actually care about the old MW communities as they cant predict what will happen as they just dont have accurate data to predict anything: just looking to steal 100k users from WoT.

Haeso, on 29 November 2011 - 08:32 AM, said:

No, it's really not, because it creates the exact same situation except it takes longer and arbitrarily weakens ranged weapons unless you compensate by increasing range or decreasing movement speed.

Yes it actually is, they would have compensate for the randomness of a long range shot to justify them. Following that logic you have to balance long range weapons proportionally to both the output of short range weapons and the RnG factor to keep them a viable option.

Without RnG the same situation does exists, but without the retarded dice roll factor, simply because the system decided to roll badly.

Haeso, on 29 November 2011 - 08:32 AM, said:

Without replacing the entire hitbox system with something new, you cannot have pinpoint accuracy in a 'Mech game. The game was purposefully designed with damage across multiple areas, or using a TC, less firepower and less chance of hitting overall*, the ability to target one specific area.

And if you're going to replace the damage model... you'd need to rebalance all the chassis and weapons, quite frankly you might as well call the game MechAssault Online at that point so I can stop hoping for a game I'll enjoy for more than a week.

Which game are we talking about? TT, MW2, MW3 or MW4?

[bert bargo]

I know it's not the most popular stance but I feel "Increase the potency of individual weapons" is the most canon solution.
You look at mech fittings in the classic Battletech manuals and even small weapons are viable to a certain extent. How many mechs feature more than 1 of the same heavy hitting weapon? I mean even the infamous Stone Rhino had like what... 2 gauss and 3 LPLs and that mech was the stuff of legend. Even the Supernova had 6 large lasers but had unprecedented heat issues. Yet in other mechwarrior video games, if you didnt have that or a similar fitting on say, a Daishi then you were more or less DOA.

To me, boating/alphaing is just a shortcut to skill. It totally offsets a player who can move their mech in and out of cover and to accurately take down enemies at various ranges. Just locking on with 6 sets of LRM20s and hammering the foe from across the map takes 0 skill. Driving a medium mech right in your face and melting legs off with a medium laser alpha also takes 0 skill. Well, maybe a little bit of skill to survive running up into firing range but not too much.

edit: It feels like people have been lazy in mechwarrior games for forever. I remember in Mechcommander multiplayer how there'd always be 3 players who just got 4 jumping madcats and just loaded them up with nothing but LRMs and won with no effort. It wasnt even that uncommon to see 12 atlases cruising around. Mw3: boats boats boats. AC20s would rock your mech all over the place and 3 salvos would demolish whatever you were driving. Mw4: boats boats poptarts, yum. To me, there was just cheese and shockingly little skill.

Its like running around no-scoping with a 50 cal. The devs in Your Favorite FPS had an intention for sniper rifles to be "artillery" as it were but its more than common to see players running around with literal hand-cannons and effectively using them with unprecedented mobility and destruction. I'm not calling these players unskilled, but they're not exactly following the intention of the weapon, you know?

Edited by bert bargo, 29 November 2011 - 11:18 AM.

[Malavai Fletcher]

MaddMaxx, on 29 November 2011 - 10:21 AM, said:

Cool. Thanks. So the TC's would remove what otherwise may have been further Medium or Short ranged firepower?

Yeah,but i would of put another lrm10 on the scat and maybe another lrm 20 on the maddog.

[Dlardrageth]

DV^McKenna, on 29 November 2011 - 10:51 AM, said:

[...]
Actually its not, the vast majority of the player base will come from people who have played Mechwarrior Games since creation, along with those fans of the TT, the smallest portion of the player base will be the completely new to the universe crowd, its not talking **** its simple fact, to dispute it is rather odd. Do you really think this game is going to draw in more new players than old?

In fact, I do. I do think it, not state it as a randomly made-up fact.

At least initially in the first months after launch I expect more new players. How it will look in the long run, who will actually stay as a "regular", might be a different matter, but that wasn't in dispute here. And you make again the same assumption about the future player base as Tyrant. Care to quote any facts to prove that? Obviously not, because there are none, just like in the post I quoted.

Edited by Dlardrageth, 29 November 2011 - 11:19 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Haeso, on 29 November 2011 - 11:08 AM, said:

And the quote I used should explain it will not be like the previous incarnations of MechWarrior. I'm not sure how else to read it. It will have similarities to be certain, but very much it's own game. Whereas aside from 4, all the MechWarrior games were fairly close to each other though progressing in their own way game design and technology wise. 4 was a large departure the series and only moderately more popular as I understand it, around 50% more sales? Given this and given that it was released years later, I'd question if those sales figures were a net gain relative to the population with access to gaming PCs.

If you're using cover, you're poptarting, if you're poptarting and winning the people you're playing against suck. I suppose light on the heat sink laser boats could use it to cool off, same principle as poptarting though.

An exception might be when the crest of the hill/mech choice allows you to fire without revealing legs, in which case they'd be aiming CT anyway, no?

Yes and no, if your exposing yourself long enough that they can shoot back, your doing it wrong, very wrong, sniping is very much about shooting the first shot and getting back into cover before they return fire.

Quote

Everyone making claims like these: Is there any data to support people preferring MW4 to say, Mw2/mw3, from every poll I've seen MW2/3 are usually more popular but I'm tired and my memory is fuzzy, maybe I'm wrong? I don't think I am. the only real advantage of mw4 was the multiplayer support. MW2 multiplayer wasn't even native at the start, and was laggy as hell usually, MW3 was native but laggy as hell, mw4 was the first mostly playable multiplayer and that had to do solely with the technology available not with the game design choices.

I'd say fans of earlier MW/TT outnumber fans of MW4, and they've already stated this isn't a game like say, MechAssault, so working under the assumption that it's not for those people... I'm not sure what you're getting at. Yes the established playerbase is where most of the game's initial players will come from, and if the game is successful it will grow from there, from what I can guess, older MW/Tabletop is what most people in that group prefer.

If you actually read my post i did not name any particular incarnation of MW, simple fact a good 70/80% of this games player base will come from people who have or are playing previous Mechwarrior games, what other corner of the gaming market even knows about this ?? next to none.

[Alex Wolf]

I guess boating is the real issue the developers have to find a way of fixing, not the "circle of death" as mentioned earlier. Mechwarrior always described mechs as having multiple types of weapon systems, yet the metagame seems to depend entirely on boats.

Why are omnimechs better? They can boat easier and more. What is the best mech for a role? One that can boat most efficiently, with spread boating areas. What mechs are bad? Those that can't boat, or have only one good boating arm. Need long range? LL/missile boat. Short range? LBX boat. World of boats. Boatwarrior.

I'm not the enemy of the metagame per se, but I believe it would be a fun, good experience if variety can have a place too, and the default loadouts are not rubbish before you remove all the weapons that are not Large Lasers and add three more Large Lasers.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Dlardrageth, on 29 November 2011 - 11:18 AM, said:

In fact, I do. I do think it, not state it as a randomly made-up fact.

At least initially in the first months after launch I expect more new players. How it will look in the long run, who will actually stay as a "regular", might be a different matter, but that wasn't in dispute here. And you make again the same assumption about the future player base as Tyrant. Care to quote any facts to prove that? Obviously not, because there are none, just like in the post I quoted.

And what other corner of the gaming world will know about this game, let alone even care to produce an influx or new players that will out number the people involved with this universe for the last 20,30 years?

[Kudzu]

DV^McKenna, on 29 November 2011 - 11:19 AM, said:

If you actually read my post i did not name any particular incarnation of MW, simple fact a good 70/80% of this games player base will come from people who have or are playing previous Mechwarrior games, what other corner of the gaming market even knows about this ?? next to none.

How long has it been since the last MW? How many more people have access to/ are into online gaming? How many of those gamers are even old enough to remember MW4? As far as people not knowing, a well targeted ad campaign will fix a lot of that.

You might want to rethink your facts.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Kudzu, on 29 November 2011 - 11:25 AM, said:

How long has it been since the last MW? How many more people have access to/ are into online gaming? How many of those gamers are even old enough to remember MW4? As far as people not knowing, a well targeted ad campaign will fix a lot of that.

You might want to rethink your facts.

A well targeted Ad campaign that will cost money, for a free too play game that will take money out of what little it already has?
I think you might want to rethink reality. The only exposure this game will get, is in reviews and previews, and if your not already interested in mech your not going to pay it any more attention when the next itteration of Award Winning multi year release game is reviewed on page 56.

[Tyrant]

Kudzu, on 29 November 2011 - 11:25 AM, said:

How long has it been since the last MW? How many more people have access to/ are into online gaming? How many of those gamers are even old enough to remember MW4? As far as people not knowing, a well targeted ad campaign will fix a lot of that.

You might want to rethink your facts.

That would do it yes, but where will this company find money for advertising for a F2P game?

[Haeso]

Tyrant, on 29 November 2011 - 11:09 AM, said:

Pop faster, dont get hit.

Popping doesn't work when you get rushed and your low DPS high burst weapons are worthless. In a straight up fight Gauss/PCC/ERLL are all awful.

Quote

My assumptions are based on looking at the situation from Dev;s side:

If the devs develop a niche simulator what are the chances that MW2 fans will play, MW3, MW4? What about non-MW fans? What are the chances of these people giving them money? Their wallets will direct the design to something more akin to today's games, and they will opt for the safer bet.

They've already stated they're going for a simulator not a MechAssault, numerous times even. I'll give their integrity slightly more credit than you, as a developer I know the merits of developing the game you want over the game that a market analyst tells you will probably sell better. I believe they're here to make a living and make the game they want, not sell out and make a game they feel ashamed to have their name on in exchange for the promise of more money when that promise of more money doesn't even take into account oversaturation and is a best case scenario. Simulators don't tend to make tons of money, they're also much less likely to fail spectacularly because there's little market saturation.

People talk about sales figures and money without understand hardly anything that goes on in this industry...

Quote

Pop faster, why are your legs exposed when you pop? Thought you were good at this game.

If you're poptarting, they're going to core you, every time you pop you must expose your CT, if they're lining up on you before you crest the ridge using radar, or simply watching the ridge, they've got the advantage on you in timing, unless you're playing Third Person, in which case I laugh at you and your magical floating eye. Then yes the poptart has the advantage in a sniping contest, but again I'll say if both sides are sniping, one team needs to man up and get close as a group and eat them for breakfast. Poptart DPS is awful, their one advantage is the popping. Get in their face.

Quote

I am happy you think that way. From all of the information released I would have to say they are going for the same monetization model and the same people who play and pay for WoT but prefer mechs over tanks. A wild guess, they dont actually care about the old MW communities as they cant predict what will happen as they just dont have accurate data to predict anything: just looking to steal 100k users from WoT.

You would have to guess, yes. Me I'd guess based on the vastly more successful LoL monetization than WoT, but that's just me. Not to mention the repeated claims of "Not pay to win" and frequent reassurances of being Mechwarrior/Battletech fans as well. If you've read the story for how they got the rights for the game, I'd say they're pretty diehard about it, and they're making the game they want.

Quote

Yes it actually is, they would have compensate for the randomness of a long range shot to justify them. Following that logic you have to balance long range weapons proportionally to both the output of short range weapons and the RnG factor to keep them a viable option.

Without RnG the same situation does exists, but without the retarded dice roll factor, simply because the system decided to roll badly.

Every weapon has it's own CoF, Short range weapons would have a larger CoF as their max range is shorter, effective accuracy at max range is the same*. Accuracy increases gradually as distance decreases.

*Generally speaking. Different weapons may/may not have different base accuracies. Ex; a laser is probably more accurate than an autocannon if both are built for the same range, going by MW4 say a UAC5/ERLL.

Quote

Which game are we talking about? TT, MW2, MW3 or MW4?

I'm talking about Battletech. MW is all based off Battletech, otherwise we'd have a total healthbar rather than different healthbars for each location, though in MW4 with Pinpoint Accuracy there were only 2-3 relevant locations. Pinpoint Accuracy bypasses the multiple hitboxes, which breaks everything. There's a reason MW4 had to have one-hit protection...

[Kagemusha]

Haeso, the skill ceiling for MW4 was not low at all. There were plenty of skill factors that many people missed, because they never got to the highest levels, or weren't consistently playing against the best. As a person who played with and against the best, I can faithfully say that most of these players continued to improve their game over the years. We got quicker, smarter, learned better configs and tactics, and became more adapt at a wider range of weapons and mechs.

While a game like SC2 or CS has a high skill ceiling as well, those games tend to be in just a slightly faster twitch. Mech involved more factors, and thus this obscured some of what made the best players the best. I can count very few players that I consider were equals at the highest levels. Further, there were some teams that were very good teams, but they didn't have a single player that I would consider to have been at the highest level. This was another factor that made MW4 so interesting, challenging, and fun.

[Kagemusha]

Haeso, on 29 November 2011 - 11:44 AM, said:

Popping doesn't work when you get rushed and your low DPS high burst weapons are worthless. In a straight up fight Gauss/PCC/ERLL are all awful.

Only if you are a poor player, and you don't know how to move around the map while popping on them, and pushing your opponent into the open.

Forced first person no-respawn matches had a very different style of play from third person respawn games. But one of the reasons that popping worked, was because with concentrated fire, and proper movement, you could destroy your opponent before he/she could get in close to you.

Edited by Kagemusha, 29 November 2011 - 11:49 AM.