134 replies to this topic

[MischiefSC]

Pjwned, on 15 July 2014 - 07:01 PM, said:

The issue is the tone. There are already threads on the actual issue - over-nerfing the HGN on jumpjets. The other issue literally is the OPs tone.

Does that make sense? It's a fundamental aspect of human communication; what you say is in many ways less relevant than how you say it. The topic is one that's already been brought up, repeatedly and more intelligently, by other people and prior to this thread. Making another post in that format isn't actually a legitimate issue for discussion, it's attempting to justify throwing a tantrum. I'm all over debate over bad balance decisions - I've already said, repeatedly and long before this came in, the slow-mo gravity disrupter jump jets in MW:O are bad and need a rework, this update not being it.

That's not really the point of the thread though is it? It's to couch throwing a tantrum in a topic. That's what I'm calling out.

[L3GR0DANCER]

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2014 - 07:02 PM, said:

That was classy. Exactly what I was talking about, summed up in your own words. Inspiring actually.

Seriously. Did you get raised to say things like 'shut your face, you filthy X apologist'? Would you say that in person?

We're not even talking about arguing racism or something significant. We're talking about pretend robots in a game of shoot-em-up, over which you're using terms that are still over the top in subjects like discrimination or huge significant social issues. I would ask you where society failed you but I'm suspecting the answer wouldn't be productive.

Thanks though. That's pretty much exactly what I was talking about. Spot on.

I would absolutely say that to a person. Indeed, I have said and would say much worse. Not everyone is content to live a life of sniveling, milk-toast passivity, but it's good to know where you stand on the issue.

Yes, there are more pressing issues than the state of MWO in the world, but then again, you're the one trying to castigate people for the tone of their forum posts on the MWO forum, so there's that. Damn son, the cognitive dissonance is almost palpable. Stop trying to foist your ridiculous notions of civility on the interwebs; it's a fools errand.

Also just to keep things classy, I hope you're impaled on the member of a large stallion.

[Pjwned]

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2014 - 07:09 PM, said:

The issue is the tone. There are already threads on the actual issue - over-nerfing the HGN on jumpjets. The other issue literally is the OPs tone.

Does that make sense? It's a fundamental aspect of human communication; what you say is in many ways less relevant than how you say it. The topic is one that's already been brought up, repeatedly and more intelligently, by other people and prior to this thread. Making another post in that format isn't actually a legitimate issue for discussion, it's attempting to justify throwing a tantrum. I'm all over debate over bad balance decisions - I've already said, repeatedly and long before this came in, the slow-mo gravity disrupter jump jets in MW:O are bad and need a rework, this update not being it.

That's not really the point of the thread though is it? It's to couch throwing a tantrum in a topic. That's what I'm calling out.

If you don't have anything worthwhile to say then don't post, and you're the one throwing a tantrum because you don't like somebody's tone, NOBODY cares if you're going to get on a soapbox and preach about SOCIETY HAS CLEARLY FAILED YOU BECAUSE I GET BENT OUT OF SHAPE ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE SAY IN INTERNET ARGUMENTS.

[Noth]

Pjwned, on 15 July 2014 - 07:18 PM, said:

If you don't have anything worthwhile to say then don't post, and you're the one throwing a tantrum because you don't like somebody's tone, NOBODY cares if you're going to get on a soapbox and preach about SOCIETY HAS CLEARLY FAILED YOU BECAUSE I GET BENT OUT OF SHAPE ABOUT WHAT PEOPLE SAY IN INTERNET ARGUMENTS.

Those caps indicate that you are also getting bent out of shape by what people say in internet arguments.

Edited by Noth, 15 July 2014 - 07:21 PM.

[MischiefSC]

L3GR0DANCER, on 15 July 2014 - 07:12 PM, said:

I would absolutely say that to a person. Indeed, I have said and would say much worse. Not everyone is content to live a life of sniveling, milk-toast passivity, but it's good to know where you stand on the issue.

Yes, there are more pressing issues than the state of MWO in the world, but then again, you're the one trying to castigate people for the tone of their forum posts on the MWO forum, so there's that. Damn son, the cognitive dissonance is almost palpable. Stop trying to foist your ridiculous notions of civility on the interwebs; it's a fools errand.

Also just to keep things classy, I hope you're impaled on the member of a large stallion.

Hey, you keep being you. We'll keep carrying for you and taking what you say less seriously. As to civility on the internet, not trying to force anyone to do anything - just making it clear that some things get respect, some don't. Wondering why nobody takes you that seriously, helpful if someone tells you why, right?

Anyway, shine on you crazy diamond!

[Pjwned]

Noth, on 15 July 2014 - 07:19 PM, said:

Those caps indicate that you are also getting bent out of shape by what people say in internet arguments.

You're right, I do find it annoying when people attempt to stifle discussions for idiotic reasons.

[L3GR0DANCER]

MischiefSC, on 15 July 2014 - 07:20 PM, said:

Hey, you keep being you. We'll keep carrying for you and taking what you say less seriously. As to civility on the internet, not trying to force anyone to do anything - just making it clear that some things get respect, some don't. Wondering why nobody takes you that seriously, helpful if someone tells you why, right?

Anyway, shine on you crazy diamond!

lol. Shine on I shall. It's not my fault I have a congenital disease that renders me unable to post things that are insufficiently crude and bombastic >:0

[Lindonius]

Noth, on 15 July 2014 - 06:40 PM, said:

If that is the case why have they not started producing new space sims because of the more successful SC.

http://www.pcgamer.c...bout-right-now/

Edited by Lindonius, 15 July 2014 - 07:49 PM.

[Hellen Wheels]

This patch is a total piece of ****

That is all

[Noth]

Lindonius, on 15 July 2014 - 07:49 PM, said:

http://www.pcgamer.c...bout-right-now/

1. Not a sim, also smaller indie dev, needing to be greenlit (it wouldn't be doing much without steams greenlight program which works of players votes not actual publishers.

2. RPG, arcadey game, not a space sim. Arcadey space game are very common.

3. Small start up developer. No publisher

4. Kickstarter project. Again no publisher.

5. Kickstarter project. Again no publisher.

6. Small team, no publisher

7. Yes a sim, but vastly different sim than SC style sim, small team again who are self publishing

8. indie game, No publisher

9. X games, about the only one here with a dedicated publisher, that has been with Egosoft for years.

10. Kickstarter, no publisher

11. self published, funded by a wildly successful MMO that rakes in money

12. Not a space sim

13. Star citizen itself

14. Not a space sim.

So you showed me some indie devs (which almost always make some space sim, some damn good ones at that). And self published games either coming from a company dedicated to the genre (the X series), or piggy backing trying to expand on their main game (CCP with EvE). That list pretty much shows that publishers are not wanting to pick up space sims despite the success that SC has had.

So why would a publisher pick up Mechwarrior on the success this game has had when they also have to pay for the license from Microsoft?

Edited by Noth, 15 July 2014 - 08:22 PM.

[divinedisclaimer]

Edit ^ the last X game was a bigger failure than MWO by leagues, MWO is a cool arena shooter.

I like jump jets

Edited by divinedisclaimer, 15 July 2014 - 08:10 PM.

[Lindonius]

Noth, on 15 July 2014 - 08:09 PM, said:

So why would a publisher pick up Mechwarrior on the success this game has had when they also have to pay for the license from Microsoft?

I'm sorry but your responses on this discussion to date have not convinced me that you are of sufficient intellectual capacity to be worthy of continuing this debate with me. I will just reiterate my original point (which is that this tired old notion that the franchise will die if this shovelware isn't successful, is complete and utter bobbins) and move on.

Thanks for your time.

[Noth]

Lindonius, on 15 July 2014 - 08:33 PM, said:

I'm sorry but your responses on this discussion to date have not convinced me that you are of sufficient intellectual capacity to be worthy of continuing this debate with me. I will just reiterate my original point (which is that this tired old notion that the franchise will die if this shovelware isn't successful, is complete and utter bobbins) and move on.

Thanks for your time.

You have yet to say why someone would pick up an IP of a failed game if no one would do it back when it was a very successful game. You just say that well they've made money here so naturally someone would. Which is not really enough for anyone to pick up an IP as many IP that have fallen into disuse made good money for people, yet are not being picked up/continued with.

Edited by Noth, 15 July 2014 - 08:38 PM.

[Karamarka]

I agree, this change was super rash and wasn't thought through too well for people... you can still poptart with 1 jump jet and compared to Battle Tech (150 meters distance) you are nowhere near close.

They made the Nova have a 33 Jump distance whereas before it had a jump distance of 28 - seems like a buff right? - WRONG, the problem with this is that the initial height is lower - therefore the overall jump distance is worse (you used to be able to glide down due to the height of the initial jump)

So, what we've got here is a nerf for both Summoner and Nova, who have built in FIVE JUMP JETS. Or whoever else used more jump jets than 1 or 2. Such as the Heavy Metal (But i don't personally use the Heavy Metal so i cannot personally comment on the situation for it)

The game doesn't even play like jump jets anymore, more like Jump Jets from a Harrier.

HARRIERS from 1960's, they weigh 11 tons and USE A fan to lift... they are almost the same as what we have now (Better because their fan lasts forever) - when you want to go over a wall or something in a Summoner or Nova, you have to hump the wall and glide up the wall - no more flying up and over the wall. Just hump the wall.....

So yeah, you can climb just as good but now - you are flying up walls instead of over them and it requires a full burn to do the same stuff as before.

Edited by Karamarka, 15 July 2014 - 08:45 PM.

[RagingOyster]

Viktor Drake, on 15 July 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:

Yep just what I thought, a typical PGI fix.

I never subscribed to the 1 JJ builds and always thought PGI should have made it so that you would be required to mount 3 JJs minimum in order to jump. Of course this is such a simple solution and one that easily solves the 1 JJ build dilemma so of course PGI doesn't do this.

Instead they have a better idea. Lets make it so if you mount the maximum JJs on a mech, it only fuctions like they would have worked previously with just 2 JJs mounted on the mech. Yeah this solves the problem. NOT!!!

Seriously PGI WTF are you thinking???

Jump Snipers and Poptarts never needed height to accomplish what they were doing, in fact jumping too high just made them better targets. No what they needed was to just just high enough to fire a quick burst without exposing themselves for any longer than required. YOU CAN STILL FRICKEN DO THIS!!!

What you can't do is get anywhere near the mobility out of JJs on mechs that weren't using the Meta builds and instead were using JJs for high mobility builds with the ability to jump in and out of battle to evade and perform hit and run tactics.

So yeah right on PGI, way to make the game ALOT LESS FRICKEN FUN WITHOUT fixing a damn thing.

Also I want my damn money back for my Heavy Metal. The most interesting thing about that mech was that it could mount 5 JJs and jump around like a light mech. Now it is almost worthless to even use JJs on it, let along 10 fricken tons worth of JJs and it is no longer the mech I purchased. You massively nerfed a Cash item and that is unacceptable.

Look OP, you have a legitimate complaint. That's fine, and it's part of what these forums are for. But don't get all ******* pissy and entitled, insulting PGI and making snide remarks just because you don't think they fixed the issue in the exact way YOU believe to be best. You just made a tremendous ass of yourself and lost any and all credibility by taking a condescending attitude and hurling sarcasm and insults like a teenage boy. Personally, I have not at all experienced the devastating nerf that makes JJs all but useless. My JJ mechs still work just fine as mobile mid-range fighters that can negotiate cliffs and other rough terrain just fine.

If you want to make a complaint, make a complaint. Quit your whining and condescending.

[Khobai]

Quote

The mechanic that caused that situation to happen was the hill climbing code being too punitive. Of course we shouldn't remove the hill climb system, but it needs to be loosened up. We could probably give an extra 5-10 degrees of max climbing angle to each movement archetype, and also buff the Hill Climb module to not suck (make it give the user a smaller movement archetype or something).

Both a JJ nerf and hill climbing buff sounds good to me.

Also I think the entire hill climbing system needs a revamp. The slowdown angle should be the same for ALL mechs. All that should change is the amount of slowdown, which should be based on the tonnage of the mech, along with any hill climbing quirks the mech might have.

Edited by Khobai, 15 July 2014 - 08:58 PM.

[MischiefSC]

No, what we need is JJs to throw a mech up and forward with significant force and drop at proper acceleration. This would scale back poptarting way, way more than any of the would-be fixes we've had so far.

The number of JJs a mech needs to lift is already tied to the SIZE of the JJs - this is why an HGN needs 2ton JJs and a spider needs 1/2 ton JJs. Every JJ gets you 1/2 a mech height in lift - as in total thrust, so 1 JJ gets you a jump 1/2 the height of a Centurion for context, with 0 fuel left. 2 JJs a full Cents height, 3 JJs 1.5 Cents worth, etc.

This is how they were designed in TT for these very balance reasons. Terrain had 'levels'. Mechs are a Level 2 object on average. That means a level 1 building only provides cover for the bottom 1/2 of the mech. Each JJ gives 1 height level of thrust, so you needed 2 JJs to get on top of a level 2 building - the height of a mech.

It was, however, done at approximately the same speed a mech traveled at - around 80 KPH or faster, depending on the mech obviously. Max JJs were determined by your engine size; remember, your JJs are powered by the fusion engine.

This is thus a self-correcting issue. JJs launch you up fast, you slow to apogee making you an easier target, you fall faster and faster. A poptart would need at least 2 JJs to avoid fall damage from clearing even mech-height terrain to shoot effectively and they'd spend far less time at a good firing position. Possible? Sure, just harder and less reliable.

The hover-jet gravity manipulators we currently have and this new convoluted and illogical jj modification is like Ghost Heat. Does it kinda work in some situations? Sure, I guess. It's just counter-intuitive, over-engineered and clumsy.

[eblackthorn]

I had to invest and extra ton of JJ's into my arrow to give it a useful amount of lift. I think this is a fair trade off. JJ's needed to be brought back into line.

[Karamarka]

eblackthorn, on 15 July 2014 - 09:42 PM, said:

I had to invest and extra ton of JJ's into my arrow to give it a useful amount of lift. I think this is a fair trade off. JJ's needed to be brought back into line.

yeah and my FIVE JJ Nova has to run up to walls and hug them just to get over them. Dat N3rf

Edited by Karamarka, 15 July 2014 - 10:52 PM.

[Thorn Hallis]

Lindonius, on 15 July 2014 - 06:15 PM, said:

I would imagine that they would see the ridiculous amount of money made by the founders and subsequent packs, and then launch an enquiry as to how the game failed despite the obvious demand from the playerbase. They would then discover that the reason for said failure was due to gross mismanagement by the dev company, and sell the IP to a different company with a track record in the industry that is siginificantly better than that of making $10 a pop Walmart shovelware.

As long as MWO makes "the ridiculous amount of money", how could it fail.