Dev Vlog #4
#21
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:03 AM
#22
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:04 AM
In "older FPSes", like Half Life, Unreal, Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory, and other old games, the game was pretty much able to switch between two modes OF THE SAME weapon. All one would have to do is program a new keybind for what amounts to "alternate fire".
That is how most games do it. I'm not even sure why this sounds like Lostech.
Edited by Deathlike, 28 May 2014 - 09:05 AM.
#23
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:11 AM
#24
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:15 AM
#25
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:21 AM
Runs With Scissors, on 28 May 2014 - 09:15 AM, said:
Would you rather have the instant lock loss module, or an arty strike? Eventually we'll have enough modules to choose between that some hard decisions will have to be made, especially in a tournament scenario where the map is known.
#26
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:23 AM
From the bottom of my heart, listen to me, what you have up there is unsalvageable.
It is time.
Edited by Goosfraba, 28 May 2014 - 09:23 AM.
#27
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:24 AM
Is it pre determined or is it a choice akin to the phoenix medalions ?
#28
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:28 AM
Edited by Sarlic, 28 May 2014 - 09:29 AM.
#29
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:30 AM
Deathlike, on 28 May 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:
In "older FPSes", like Half Life, Unreal, Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory, and other old games, the game was pretty much able to switch between two modes OF THE SAME weapon. All one would have to do is program a new keybind for what amounts to "alternate fire".
That is how most games do it. I'm not even sure why this sounds like Lostech.
He did say "the way we have the weapons designed" or something to that effect.
I foresee a lot of core component rewrites in PGI's future.
(Weapons, MM, Heat system, etc..)
-----------------------------------------
Also, very disappointing to see they're looking at the damage of the strikes rather than the frequency/amount.
Arty strikes are supposed to hurt. The problem isn't the damage they're putting out, it's in a good place, the problem is that there are 24 of them in a match, and often in rapid succession...
Edited by Livewyr, 28 May 2014 - 09:32 AM.
#30
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:31 AM
#31
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:33 AM
Clan LBs and switching ammo: DUH! I told you so last year. This is why I always suggested that you could equip both weapons when you add one. Want to fire a UAC in single fire mode without jamming? When you equip it, you can also apply it as a weapon group set as an AC5. Want to fire slugs from the LB 10? You can apply it as a seperate weapon group as a normal AC10. Why is this so damned hard?
As for the MM, here is a simple freaking solution: MULTI-MECH QUEUING!!! What is killing your code is the fact that you've got a limited population base from which to pull matches together. Your MM is pulling on ELO, weight class, and then weight. Don't you think that it pairs down the possibilities a bit much? Well, why not allow for people to queue up as many mechs as they want and then be given the choice of what mechs that can use based on what is pulled in? For all that is logical, stop shooting yourself in the foot by limiting a system which is already strained with limitations.
#32
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:36 AM
Livewyr, on 28 May 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:
I foresee a lot of core component rewrites in PGI's future.
(Weapons, MM, Heat system, etc..)
Well, a number of patches ago, they "optimized" how heatsinks interact with water.
That's just a glimpse of things to come... "it needs more work/optimizing".
Here though, it's more with respect to "design" and "easily modifiable".
Edited by Deathlike, 28 May 2014 - 09:37 AM.
#33
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:39 AM
some great information load, although I m,ay not like some of the details (those modules sound too good to be limited cash-only items) but the amount of info coming out is great
Would have loved to see more clan mech cockpits, one is not enough!
#34
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:40 AM
#35
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:43 AM
#37
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:47 AM
#38
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:48 AM
#39
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:48 AM
Does this mean that the idea of minimum 2, maximum 4 has been thrown out? I know that that had a very positive response when discussing alternatives to 4 by 3 in another thread.
#40
Posted 28 May 2014 - 09:49 AM
Livewyr, on 28 May 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:
Arty strikes are supposed to hurt. The problem isn't the damage they're putting out, it's in a good place, the problem is that there are 24 of them in a match, and often in rapid succession...
I agree, keep the pain but space them out, make the global team CD for Arty and Air Strikes 60-180 seconds and make the CD grow for every use.
4 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users