1258 replies to this topic

[xCico]

DO IT, DO IT, DO IT, DO BOTH, remove that meta already!

[Aleraen]

Lockdown is frankly too complicated, and does take a lot of the player made build options out of the equation. Slow the speed down. Again, halving it brings PPCs back to when they were virtually non-usable. Drop it by a quarter, or at the very extreme's a third. But half? You're robbing Peter to pay Paul.

[wanderer]

Cerberias, on 05 August 2014 - 04:47 PM, said:

Both of these ideas basically suck arse. Do you devs still not play your own game?

Paul has his own island. The Island Of Ivory Tower Builds.

Because at this point, playing under his own name often results in outright hostility and people making a point about game mechanics by pushing them to the utmost, nigh-abusive levels. Back in the day, that was things along the lines of "Goons heart Paul", nowadays I wouldn't be surprised if most of the devs get treated to the nastiest potential expressions of the meta available, and/or overkill.

That's almost as bad as making game changes in isolation, and the combination seems to lead to some VERY weird priorities on balance. The original proposals that start this topic are Grade-A examples of such a disconnect, IMHO.

It'd make being in groups tough, because TS + recognizing dev voice = cries of favoritism.

[IraqiWalker]

xCico, on 05 August 2014 - 04:52 PM, said:

DO IT, DO IT, DO IT, DO BOTH, remove that meta already!

I don't even know where to start here. Did you even think about any mech that ISN'T the DWF?

Since almost all of them will be hurt by this.

[Sandpit]

IraqiWalker, on 05 August 2014 - 06:07 PM, said:

I don't even know where to start here. Did you even think about any mech that ISN'T the DWF?

Since almost all of them will be hurt by this.

I doubt it, and people like that are exactly why we've gotten some of the changes we've had unfortunately.

[ReXspec]

So, I guess the next question is, will any of this overwhelming consensus AGAINST Paul's proposed system and toward alternative solutions to his system actually go anywhere?

Because, as of right now, we have 51 (going on 52 pages) of prime feedback and still not one little peep from Paul, Niko, any devs, or anyone on P.G.I.'s side that can tell us where they stand as far as our feedback goes, or the decision-making process to finding an alternative solution.

That stated, are we to assume that P.G.I. simply won't listen to us? Or will they actually consider fixing the root of the issue rather then outright nerf the Gauss/PPC combo?

Paging Paul Inouye or Nikolai Lubkiewicz? Please pick up the white courtesy phone?

Edited by ReXspec, 05 August 2014 - 08:43 PM.

[Wispsy]

ReXspec, on 05 August 2014 - 02:47 PM, said:

Oh? A would-be philosopher, eh? Well, Lord E N E R G Y, I would just like to inform you that your rebuttal was not a rebuttal. Actually, it was what is known as "red herring." You really weren't addressing the issue, you were questioning reality, which doesn't lead to any form of discourse, it leads to circular logic.

Please try to give a legitimate answer.

"Not a fact" based on what evidence? Again, you have not given a rebuttal, you have just given presumptuous hot-air.



We're not talking about who is more/less dangerous, we're talking about who's job is harder.

If the sniper has a Gauss as a rest weapon, and can do anywhere from 30 - 60 points of damage, that doesn't matter. Plus, your assuming all brawlers can close the distance at over 60 - 70kph, while taking the best possible flanking route to the sniper. If the sniper can't reposition to compensate for this, that isn't an explanation, it's a cop-out. Unless the sniper is alone, and front lines have completely degenerated, a sniper always has an oppurtunity to reposition behind the safety of cover or his friends. And don't try to tell me otherwise. I've been in the military and I have buddies who practice vehicular combat who tell me of similar tactics.



The truth hurts, pseudo-lord E N E R G Y. You're over-complicating a snipers job with non-specific terms. What you are referring to is the basics of piloting, which, presumably the average player at least has some idea of (note: I didn't say new or bad players). And yes, a light's job is arguably harder because it does involve those elements that you just mentioned.


Bullsh*t.



We know you have an ego the size of the moon, and we know you think of yourself as God's gift to the Mechwarrior community. Stay on topic, please, and don't water your point down with petty insults. It doesn't discredit me, it discredits you.

PLEASE stop with the red herrings. We're dealing with the issues in game. Right now. And P.G.I. has readily admitted the issues mentioned in this thread need to be fixed. IF you have no suggestions to add, then say the game is fine where it is and be done with it and continue to impart your "gaming expertise" elsewhere.



Those aren't "imaginary labels" those are called "industry categories" or "industry standards." Stop talking out of your a*s in an asinine attempt to discredit me, and everyone else who recognizes PP damage and convergence as a problem. This isn't a L2P issue, this is a gameplay issue. Stop thinking like a psuedo-intellectual and start thinking in terms of development practicality. If the franchise is advertised as a "31st Century, vehicular combat simulator" then the devs should make their game as such. You can't advertise your game as a boardgame, when it's actually an FPS. That's simply bad business and bad game design.



And WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT BY RIPPING OFF CONCEPTS FROM OTHER GAMES! You have to recognize that this game is apart of another genre and the ONLY similarities of the competitive scenes between all three of those games and this one is the fact that phenomal DOUCHEBAGS like you exist and add /nothing/ to the concept of gameplay balance!

Again, we don't need to rip-off other games to create a successful competitive scene. Moreover, we don't need to turn this game into CS:GO to do so. And insulting the community of GO? No. If I'm insulting anyone, it's only people like you who have heads ten times bigger then their normal size.



Correction: Sniping is a DOMINANT style of play right now because it is the lowest risk and highest reward.

And really? More c*ck-waving to try to discredit me?

Do I REALLY need to tell you that I've play CS for longer then a lot of people have been alive? That I played the BF series and beta-tested ALL OF THEM? Including the collossal, un-optimized failure of a release that was BF4? Do I really need to state that I have had to read the rulebooks for both TT and the RPG? And that I have read a few of the books? Granted, my memory of the rules are rusty, but my memory of those rules are probably better then yours, dude.

The fact that you try to play me off with your own ego is telling, E N E R G Y. Again, if you have nothing to add to this discussion but fallacious arrogance, then just say this game is fine, and leave. I'm sure P.G.I. will be grateful for it.

I don't competitive game anymore because it was turning me into a COLOSSAL douchebag like you. No. In point of fact, I did Q.A. testing for CS:GO, but dropped that project immediately because there were a lot of elements in it that were awful.



It's my career to test games, not compare d*ck sizes with elitists like yourself.

"Reject?" That's not a presumptuous title at all. So who did you talk to, E N E R G Y? Talk to my guidance counselor? Or did you look at a book containing my full life's story?

Drop the f*cking attitude. I'm not making any personal attacks against you, so act like an adult, and do the same.

And download CS:GO? Why would I continue to participate in a colossal waste like that game? I don't need to wave my c*ck around to prove my point, unlike you.



Yes you are. You are the very definition of a white-knight for P.G.I.


Believe it or not, with Mechwarrior, it IS possible to create the rock-paper-scissors gameplay that this game so desperately needs. I keep holding out hope that at least SOME good people in P.G.I. will hear us, which is why I'm still here. The only "meta" that should exist, is good player and team behavior. Not jump-sniping, not high-damage, pinpoint alphas. THAT is the truest definition of "player skill:" The ability to do well with a weapon system, not because the weapon system itself is strong, but because the player behind it knows how to wield it. The "cycle" only continues because people like you continue to accentuate it.

Then if it's "trivial," don't respond. Say the game is fine and move on. Again, I'm sure P.G.I. will thank you for it.

Besides that, if you do leave, then it is for the better.

We don't need a Mechwarrior like you.

I think there are some very basic things about Mechwarrior, gaming in general and English that you need to go back over before you continue commenting on the forums. I say this with your best interests at heart, currently I think you may be embarrassing yourself through ignorance...

[ReXspec]

Wispsy, on 05 August 2014 - 09:03 PM, said:

Trolls be trollin'.

For the sake of not starting a flame war, I'm just going to ignore this post and ask that you PM me if you have any personal gripes or complaints against my "qualifications" where complaining against P.G.I.'s decisions are concerned, or my ability to write.

Consider yourself on the ignore list (at least, for forum posts, anyway). If you'd like to chat, just send me a PM.

Edited by ReXspec, 05 August 2014 - 09:25 PM.

[Brenden]

If I could put my 2 Kerenskys in...

I think, a Charge time on the PPC would be in order while reducing the charge time on the Gauss Rifle by about a quarter. In addition, speed up the actual launch of the PPC. That thing is suppose to be almost laser-like in it's catapult from my Kit Fox's arm to your face. Not me fire and wait ten seconds for it to impact that face. Gauss Rifle, on the other hand, should be left alone in terms of velocity.

If this is all about Meta Builds, then I think it's safe to say that there will always be someone who can calculate the rate of which what and what will fire, and thus have a build centered around that. I'm like that with my Blackhand.

[ReXspec]

Chann Luf, on 05 August 2014 - 09:59 PM, said:

This is the way to go!

MWO should be a simulator. Adding an energy system would acctually resolve the high alpha problem and actually could replace ghost heat. Reactors should have a max energy output based on size. Energy would be needed to power the myomer muscles for movement and weapons. If you want to charge / fire more weapons than your reactor can power only some will fire. Make energy output and consumption visible. This will add more challenge to building viable loadouts and its lore!
Just think of Phelans trial of position when Vlad wanted to fire an alpha with 2 gauss and and they where fired not at once but seqentialy.
This would help to get more builds with a greater variety of different weapons back on the battlefield.
Heck you could even go as far as slowing a mech down when charging/ firing many high energy weapons at once.

Reducing "projectile" speed of the PPC is NOT the way to go. It already is slower then a gauss! Really? When was the last time you guys watched the lightning during a thunderstorm?
Make physics relevant again!

Homeless Bill made a reference to an Energy Draw system that was interesting. Your proposal and his are actually quite similar.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Of the proposed mechanics I would prefer to see the PPC's projectile speed decreased. Linking Gauss and PPCs to limit the number fired at once is adding another complicated system. In fact I think this one would intersect with all the other complicated systems. Gauss charge, 2 Gauss limit, and ghost heat. I would rather not add to that list, especially when I feel PPCs are more of the issue.

The proposed speed reduction may be too big but I think that is a good direction to go in. Increasing recycle time would also be good, or maybe even some combination of the two.

Edited by Rouken, 05 August 2014 - 10:10 PM.

[Brenden]

Rouken, on 05 August 2014 - 10:09 PM, said:

Of the proposed mechanics I would prefer to see the PPC's projectile speed decreased. Linking Gauss and PPCs to limit the number fired at once is adding another complicated system. In fact I think this one would intersect with all the other complicated systems. Gauss charge, 2 Gauss limit, and ghost heat. I would rather not add to that list, especially when I feel PPCs are more of an issue.

The proposed speed reduction may be too big but I think that is a good direction to go in. Increasing recycle time would also be good, or maybe even some combination of the two.

I don't think decreasing it would be a good idea. According to the lore, it suppose to be going at near speed of light. Considering it's ionized gas. I'd consider having only one of the weapon systems able to fire at any given time. The power needed to launch a PPC would interfere with the power going to the coils of the Gauss Rifle, for example, and thus you wouldn't be able to fire both at the same time.

[Lily from animove]

why so complicated? when a gauss or PPC fires give a global cooldown (0,5secs) on other gauss/PPC's

This way a mech armed with many gauss/PPC's will lose its heavy Alpha strike FLD. but not his overall damage output.

Simple solution, easy to code, simple to understand for newbie pilots.

[xCico]

IraqiWalker, on 05 August 2014 - 06:07 PM, said:

I don't even know where to start here. Did you even think about any mech that ISN'T the DWF?

Since almost all of them will be hurt by this.

learn2play

[ReXspec]

xCico, on 06 August 2014 - 03:22 AM, said:

learn2play

Learn2post.

Go back to CS:GO, BF4, or CoD. We don't want you here.

If you have nothing to add to the discussion, don't post.

Consider yourself ignored. If you have gripes against what I said, or against me, send me a PM. I won't feed the flames of a flame war, but I'm sure you will be itching to.

Edited by ReXspec, 06 August 2014 - 03:48 AM.

[Reno Blade]

People keep saying the charge-lock-out system would remove builds or make certain mechs outright "useless"?

Is it so hard to shoot two shots instead of one?
NO.

There are a lot of people who are skilled enough to shoot their 4 LL or 4PPC in pairs instead of alpha striking all the time.
Can't be too hard to do the same for two different weapons (in this case 2 PPC / 2 Gauss).

Other people use their 1Gauss/2PPC builds already without shooting them in sync (be it skill or preference or just missed opportunities, doesnt matter).

[L Y N X]

Jakob Knight, on 01 August 2014 - 01:39 PM, said:

Considering it is supposed to be an approximate speed-of-C weapon, yeah it is. The fact it has a delay between firing and target being hit like a projectile weapon is already an artificial characteristic meant to give the target an unrealistic advantage. However, the real problem with a speed reduction is that it would hurt all PPC use, rather than the stated goal of disrupting Gauss/PPC combo interaction. Using a given weapons configuration as an excuse to strike down configurations completely different from it would be the sign of deceptive engineering on the part of the Devs.

Lets for the sake of generosity, assume you are right, you are talking about science fiction. I am talking about game mechanics, while based on SciFi, I was not talking about SciFi, I was referring to actual patch changes that have been made. please go talk fiction somewhere else, but please to not quote my facts with your fiction.

[Gorgo7]

Lily from animove, on 06 August 2014 - 01:17 AM, said:

why so complicated? when a gauss or PPC fires give a global cooldown (0,5secs) on other gauss/PPC's

This way a mech armed with many gauss/PPC's will lose its heavy Alpha strike FLD. but not his overall damage output.

Simple solution, easy to code, simple to understand for newbie pilots.

F that! My Awesome uses 3 PPC's. Now you want me to suffer a 0.5 s delay between each of them? They have ghost heat. That is enough.

Lets see people who play with PPC's and Gauss regularly comment. Not those who have nothing to lose by changing rules for weapons they don't make use of.

[Aleraen]

For those that feel that the three-stage-charge protocol is a better option, let me float you this idea.

Imagine that it is implemented, and the next day, your best friend, your girlfriend, or perhaps yourself (for the purpose of this thought exercise), starts playing MechWarrior Online.

Where would they find the information in the in game client regarding this mechanic? Where would they find it out of client? Buried in the forums somewhere? Imagine beginning the game and suddenly being confronted with an overly convoluted limitation on what you can do. While it probably has the intended effect of steering you clear of that build, I can definitely see people going, 'Wow, this game is shockingly overly complex. What did I get myself in to?' and just plain bouncing out.

For those of you in units that recruit new players to the game, imagine having to explain to people the three stage mechanic on top of trying to properly explain the math behind ghost heat. My point simply is, adding overly complex fixes to the game makes the game even more steeply unfriendly to the new or casual player, and if the idea of the game is to grow its player base and thrive, instead of simply catering to the whales that pay stupid amounts for gold mechs and are firmly entrenched in the game regardless, it's a step back.

Edited by Aleraen, 06 August 2014 - 05:13 AM.

[Reno Blade]

Aleraen, on 06 August 2014 - 05:12 AM, said:

For those that feel that the three-stage-charge protocol is a better option, let me float you this idea.

Imagine that it is implemented, and the next day, your best friend, your girlfriend, or perhaps yourself (for the purpose of this thought exercise), starts playing MechWarrior Online.

Where would they find the information in the in game client regarding this mechanic? Where would they find it out of client? Buried in the forums somewhere? Imagine beginning the game and suddenly being confronted with an overly convoluted limitation on what you can do. While it probably has the intended effect of steering you clear of that build, I can definitely see people going, 'Wow, this game is shockingly overly complex. What did I get myself in to?' and just plain bouncing out.

For those of you in units that recruit new players to the game, imagine having to explain to people the three stage mechanic on top of trying to properly explain the math behind ghost heat. My point simply is, adding overly complex fixes to the game makes the game even more steeply unfriendly to the new or casual player, and if the idea of the game is to grow its player base and thrive, instead of simply catering to the whales that pay stupid amounts for gold mechs and are firmly entrenched in the game regardless, it's a step back.

Same thing as UAC jamming ?
Weapon turns red, can't shoot should be easy to implement and easy to understand.