1026 replies to this topic

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I love how Paul makes a stupid post, and we now have like 38 pages of drama, with no response.

They do understand how communication works right?

[DrxAbstract]

Villz, on 12 February 2014 - 12:48 PM, said:

Perhaps weapon balancing?

Leaving things in a semi functional state so you don't need to re adjust anything else related to that change is literally the stupidest approach you could ever take to balancing something.

You realize the same people that would be making these changes are the ones responsible for the current situation to begin with... Perhaps you could elaborate more on the additional specific changes necessary to properly implement such an alteration for them rather than the whole 'You should know' approach for the sake of avoiding future catastrophic functionality changes.

[Corvus Antaka]

Villz, on 12 February 2014 - 01:07 PM, said:

Sub 100 IQ's god bless em

Yes indeed. I see your massive IQ has led to incredible "Creativity"

go run back to your hole, doggie.

[Ryan Steel]

Paul @ work:
(co-workers with quotation marks)

Guys! Listen!
I have an idea
Guys
Listen

ok, what we do, ok..
guys listen

check it

ok i have this idea
guys listen

I have this idea whereby when you fire your weapons, your projectiles go in random directions. You don't even have crosshairs if you take the wrong weapons.

"ok so which weapons are the right ones?"

ok check this out. we're going to use a formula to determine which weapon combos will give you the crosshairs. That formula will change from day to day.

"will people be informed of this formula in the UI?"

no.

*silence*

"so effectively no one will be able to load up the right weapons and everyone will have no crosshairs and spray their rounds all over the place resulting in team killing, completely inconsistent victories, and zero skill involvement?"

Yes.

*silence*

Well?

"I....I don't know"

What do you mean you don't know? It's really simple. This solves the poptart meta!

"I mean we could have just---"

Listen. Just... just listen. We need to attract new players and keep the mad battletech fans happy. Those twitch shooter players are ruining our game. They're pooping on all the players using joysticks steeringwheels and we have to do something now.

"But I mean, if the projectiles go in random directions won't that mean that people who couldn't aim fast or aim at all would effectively be at equal footing with the twitch players who would aim at your dome in less than a second?"

Yes!

"So people are going to run around holding their mouse down and blowing everything up including teammates?"

Yes!

"That would ruin the game!"

Yes!

*silence*

All in favor?

[DocBach]

DrxAbstract, on 12 February 2014 - 01:21 PM, said:

You realize the same people that would be making these changes are the ones responsible for the current situation to begin with... Perhaps you could elaborate more on the additional specific changes necessary to properly implement such an alteration for them rather than the whole 'You should know' approach for the sake of avoiding future catastrophic functionality changes.

He posted his ideas a couple of posts up; lower weapon damage and buff internals.

Massed accurate fire is a problem, though, for exactly the reason Khobai pointed out. Its a problem because it's so easy to pick out weak spots in this game, and this game carries over mechanics directly from a game that didn't let you do that, a game that in fact was balanced around the fact that you couldn't do that.

[SniperCon]

Villz, on 12 February 2014 - 01:14 PM, said:

Thats possible related to the fact 1 is 20tons + heavier than the other.

U know what makes me crap it even more.

When i turn a corner and there is a boars head brawler.....

Nice logic though.

We were talking about Jagermechs, but I also feel fair matchups against Atlai, Stalkers, Cataphracts, Shadowhawks, and everything but Highlanders and Victors. Lights vs streakboats is pretty lopsided but streakboats also have their bad matchups. 4PPC Stalkers and Lurmageddon LRM boats felt unfair as well, but that has since been addressed.

[Abivard]

Ryan Steel, on 12 February 2014 - 01:26 PM, said:

Paul @ work:
(co-workers with quotation marks)

Guys! Listen!
I have an idea
Guys
Listen

ok, what we do, ok..
guys listen

check it

ok i have this idea
guys listen

I have this idea whereby when you fire your weapons, your projectiles go in random directions. You don't even have crosshairs if you take the wrong weapons.

"ok so which weapons are the right ones?"

ok check this out. we're going to use a formula to determine which weapon combos will give you the crosshairs. That formula will change from day to day.

"will people be informed of this formula in the UI?"

no.

*silence*

"so effectively no one will be able to load up the right weapons and everyone will have no crosshairs and spray their rounds all over the place resulting in team killing, completely inconsistent victories, and zero skill involvement?"

Yes.

*silence*

Well?

"I....I don't know"

What do you mean you don't know? It's really simple. This solves the poptart meta!

"I mean we could have just---"

Listen. Just... just listen. We need to attract new players and keep the mad battletech fans happy. Those twitch shooter players are ruining our game. They're pooping on all the players using joysticks steeringwheels and we have to do something now.

"But I mean, if the projectiles go in random directions won't that mean that people who couldn't aim fast or aim at all would effectively be at equal footing with the twitch players who would aim at your dome in less than a second?"

Yes!

"So people are going to run around holding their mouse down and blowing everything up including teammates?"

Yes!

"That would ruin the game!"

Yes!

*silence*

All in favor?

The results are in, no one wanted to lose their job that day so it passed unanimously .

PGI Leadership strikes again.

[FactorlanP]

IceSerpent, on 12 February 2014 - 01:12 PM, said:

When you select the target (or switch selection to a different target) the convergence distance of your weapons begins to change from the current value to where the newly selected target is. If you pull the trigger before weapons fully converge, they will fire at whatever the current convergence point is at that moment. Multiple weapons would all hit the same convergence point unless different weapons have different convergence speeds (which is also an interesting idea). Basically, it would work like this:

My weapons are converged at a point 1000m away, I switch to a target 100m away - the convergence point starts moving towards the target distance: 900...800...700...etc. If I pull the trigger when that point is still at 700, I'll bracket my target - either hit both arms or completely miss (have rounds pass to the left and to the right of the target).

They tried that in Closed Beta and they couldn't make it work.

It would be great if they could actually make that type of convergence work. I don't think they can. That Pinpoint skill in the mech tree is a hold over from early Closed Beta. It does nothing now, and hasn't done anything for a very very very very long time.

I believe they said that the convergence thing wouldn't work because it totally fried hit registration. We have enough problems with hit registration as it is...

Edited by FactorlanP, 12 February 2014 - 01:46 PM.

[Villz]

DrxAbstract, on 12 February 2014 - 01:21 PM, said:

You realize the same people that would be making these changes are the ones responsible for the current situation to begin with... Perhaps you could elaborate more on the additional specific changes necessary to properly implement such an alteration for them rather than the whole 'You should know' approach for the sake of avoiding future catastrophic functionality changes.

If they wanted my opinion they would ask. As mathew craig did when he wanted feedback on the matchmaker and as I in kind responded.

[FactorlanP]

Villz, on 12 February 2014 - 01:11 PM, said:

No Target = no convergence ? IE STRAIGHT AHEAD

HERP?

Did u really have to ask that ?

Wondering if you actually understand what convergence is at this point ....

Well heck, let's ditch convergence all together then and just make all weapons go straight ahead at all times then...

Oh wait... Everybody would just flock to chassis that pack all of the weapons in a single location....

derp

[DrxAbstract]

DocBach, on 12 February 2014 - 01:27 PM, said:

He posted his ideas a couple of posts up; lower weapon damage and buff internals.

Massed accurate fire is a problem, though, for exactly the reason Khobai pointed out. Its a problem because it's so easy to pick out weak spots in this game, and this game carries over mechanics directly from a game that didn't let you do that, a game that in fact was balanced around the fact that you couldn't do that.

Yes he posted a couple of possibilities for an idea not of his creation, which encircles my point; The idea that weapons converge only on your target was presented as a solid solution however when it comes to what additional changes should be made to smooth out the edges and make it a viable alteration are presented with infinitely less fervor and enthusiasm followed by the, as i said, 'You should know' mentality.

If he believes it's such a viable change then he should provide an entire presentation encompassing every additional modification with the necessary intricacies to form a solid foundation for its implementation... Rather than leading off with someone else's idea and calling everyone intellectually defunct for not filling in the blanks... Or i should say not filling in the blanks 'correctly'.

Just saying.

Edited by DrxAbstract, 12 February 2014 - 01:57 PM.

[SweetJackal]

FactorlanP, on 12 February 2014 - 01:48 PM, said:

Well heck, let's ditch convergence all together then and just make all weapons go straight ahead at all times then...

Oh wait... Everybody would just flock to chassis that pack all of the weapons in a single location....

derp

You mean like the hunchback? The mech that players have been notching down the totem pole as it loses over 50% of it's firepower by targeting a massive side torso?

Or how about talks that hardpoint inflation in some mechs is pointless due to the number of criticals ballistic weapons eat up?

Or talks about how a mech with weapons spread out over the mech would have to compensate by twisting and adjusting their aim to hit the same location?

I don't know how that sounds.

[FactorlanP]

I wouldn't have a problem with convergence being tied to target selection, if...

1) A mechanic for targeting a mech under ECM is created

2) A lock on function, similar to missile locks is also created.

Then weapons not converged can fire straight ahead and never converge.

The lock-on function would serve to minimize jump sniping, if the lock on mechanic takes a couple seconds to achieve lock.

Edited by FactorlanP, 12 February 2014 - 01:56 PM.

[Villz]

DrxAbstract, on 12 February 2014 - 01:50 PM, said:

Yes he posted a couple of possibilities for an idea not of his creation, which encircles my point; The idea that weapons converge only on your target was presented as a solid solution however when it comes to what additional changes should be made to smooth out the edges and make it a viable alteration are presented with infinitely less fervor and enthusiasm followed by the, as i said, 'You should know' mentality.

If he believes it's such a viable change then he should provide an entire presentation encompassing every additional modification with the necessary intricacies to form a solid foundation for its implementation... Rather than leading off with someone else's idea and calling everyone intellectually defunct for not filling in the blanks.

Just saying.

The point is if you can't do algebra don't become a physicist,

So if you don't have the deep game understanding quite yet to make such reads (nothing wrong with this) you probably shouldn't be discussing why and how it should be altered.

However spitting out ignorant ill formed non logical opinion pieces is wrong

U FEEL ME DAWG?

FactorlanP, on 12 February 2014 - 01:55 PM, said:

I wouldn't have a problem with convergence being tied to target selection, if...

1) A mechanic for targeting a mech under ECM is created

2) A lock on function, similar to missile locks is also created.

Then weapons not converged can fire straight ahead and never converge.

The lock-on function would serve to minimize jump sniping, if the lock on mechanic takes a couple seconds to achieve lock.

Any delay in the already slow gameplay is the wrong direction.
Also please give trevelyas credit for his idea.

Its now the Trevelyas Convergence Model. (TCM)

RANDOM FACT OF THE DAY:
Anyone whom champions the cause of nerfing mouse / slowing down gameplay / adding waits etc does so as a result of being a baddie.

Concious or Unconcious.

Its a FPS. If you don't like it. F$^K off and play mechcommander .....

Edited by Villz, 12 February 2014 - 02:04 PM.

[DrxAbstract]

Villz, on 12 February 2014 - 01:59 PM, said:

The point is if you can't do algebra don't become a physicist,

So if you don't have the deep game understanding quite yet to make such reads you probably shouldn't be discussing why an dhow it should be altered.

U FEEL ME DAWG?


Any delay in the already slow gameplay is the wrong direction.

Oh i understood perfectly... That you could have made your point with much less gusto was one of mine.

Oh... did you know Streaks are bugged?

Edited by DrxAbstract, 12 February 2014 - 02:03 PM.

[Abivard]

DrxAbstract, on 12 February 2014 - 02:01 PM, said:

Oh i understood perfectly... That you could have made your point with much less gusto was one of mine.

Oh... did you know Streaks are bugged?

Ummm what is not bugged in this game?

[Villz]

DrxAbstract, on 12 February 2014 - 02:01 PM, said:

Oh i understood perfectly... That you could have made your point with much less gusto was one of mine.

Oh... did you know Streaks are bugged?

I enjoy channeling my hatred for stupidity into this game as opposed to my real life

Also I prefer to use weapons I have to aim tbh. I am unaware of any issues with the guided weapon systems atm. LRMS feel fine whenever I occasionalllllllly use them.

Edited by Villz, 12 February 2014 - 02:08 PM.

[DrxAbstract]

Abivard, on 12 February 2014 - 02:05 PM, said:

Ummm what is not bugged in this game?

The pilots...

Battleship sunk.

[FactorlanP]

Villz, on 12 February 2014 - 01:59 PM, said:

Any delay in the already slow gameplay is the wrong direction.

Well you're gonna just love it as they work to increase Time to Kill then. I suspect that Hawken might be more what you are after in a game.

[DrxAbstract]

Villz, on 12 February 2014 - 02:07 PM, said:

I enjoy channeling my hatred for stupidity into this game as opposed to my real life

Also I prefer to use weapons I have to aim tbh. I am unaware of any issues with the guided weapon systems atm. LRMS feel fine whenever I occasionalllllllly use them.

You have activated my trap card!

You claim to have a 'deep understanding' yet admit to being unaware of game play issues! For someone that sees the 'big picture', your view is quite limited sir!