1258 replies to this topic

[wanderer]

Quote

The best= HAWKEN

Yes, we should really want to emulate a game with this kind of popularity. No.

[IraqiWalker]

wanderer, on 05 August 2014 - 06:43 AM, said:

Yes, we should really want to emulate a game with this kind of popularity. No.

Ouch, I knew the numbers there were bad, but I didn't think it was THAT bad.

[Deathlike]

IraqiWalker, on 05 August 2014 - 06:55 AM, said:

Ouch, I knew the numbers there were bad, but I didn't think it was THAT bad.

Let's just imagine that graph, applied to this game... even though this info is held like Fort Knox.

[ReXspec]

Deathlike, on 05 August 2014 - 07:26 AM, said:

Let's just imagine that graph, applied to this game... even though this info is held like Fort Knox.

I would like to see player demographics. Then it would give us an idea about what gameplay implementations were successful, and what gameplay implementations were NOT successful.

[Deathlike]

ReXspec, on 05 August 2014 - 07:31 AM, said:

I would like to see player demographics. Then it would give us an idea about what gameplay implementations were successful, and what gameplay implementations were NOT successful.

Like many things, PGI is going to tell us when they feel like it, and if it suits their position at the time.

I mean, if we compare the quality of the solo queue vs the group queue, it's a night and day difference. The thing is, it's difficult to discern sometimes whether Paul actually watched all levels of Elo, particularly high level... or prefers to believe the casual play as "accurate" (or, just claiming everything is fine, which is the norm).

[LCCX]

Nikolai Lubkiewicz, on 29 July 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

Greetings MechWarriors!

Please let us know which of Paul's ideas to balance PPC+Gauss you would prefer to see in-game!

Dear Paul Inouye / Nikolai Lubkiewicz / PGI,
Both the random PPC+Gauss limit and the PPC projectile speed nerf are as bad as you seem to understand they are, so don't do either. I suggest a 0.5-second duration on PPCs, like all other energy weapons, or I'd be happy to wait another month or two for something like http://www.qqmercs.com/?p=3987 to replace Ghost Heat.

[ReXspec]

Deathlike, on 05 August 2014 - 07:33 AM, said:

Like many things, PGI is going to tell us when they feel like it, and if it suits their position at the time.

I mean, if we compare the quality of the solo queue vs the group queue, it's a night and day difference. The thing is, it's difficult to discern sometimes whether Paul actually watched all levels of Elo, particularly high level... or prefers to believe the casual play as "accurate" (or, just claiming everything is fine, which is the norm).

Wouldn't it simply serve their purposes better to deal with underlying issues such as pin-point damage/convergence in a manner players can universally concede to, then implement this system on a PTR for players to test out themselves and give feedback accordingly?

Or am I simply expecting too much from Paul, or the other devs at P.G.I.?

Edited by ReXspec, 05 August 2014 - 07:45 AM.

[Deathlike]

ReXspec, on 05 August 2014 - 07:40 AM, said:

Wouldn't it simply serve their purposes better to deal with underlying issues such as pin-point damage/convergence in a manner players can universally concede to, then implement this system on a PTR for players to test out themselves and give feedback accordingly?

Or am I simply expecting too much from Paul, or the other devs at P.G.I.?

You would "hope' they try something different... but you are really asking too much of Paul and other devs. They struggled with hit detection in the first place (when that convergence stuff in the pilot trees used to work and mean something of consequence - instead of the instant convergence we have now).

[P e n u m b r a]

IraqiWalker, on 05 August 2014 - 06:32 AM, said:

None of those games have multiple parts with different HPs on your targets.


I'm sorry, have you been watching the competitive scene of MW:O or some other game?

Poptarting, and long range sniping are still the most used strategies in the competitive scene. Yes, the JJ nerfs have hit hard, and slowed down poptarting, but sniping over all is still there in dominance.

If you had been following competitive you would know who I am and yes those other games do have parts to hit (head,chest, arms and legs) all of them with much less time to kill and margin for error compared to mwo and no you have not been paying attention because pretty much all the teams in competitive are routing for a brawl other than on alpine. Can I ask who you play for and if you play anything other than open games?

Edited by L e 0, 05 August 2014 - 07:51 AM.

[IraqiWalker]

L e 0, on 05 August 2014 - 07:51 AM, said:

If you had been following competitive you would know who I am and yes those other games do have parts to hit (head,chest, arms and legs) all of them with much less time to kill and margin for error compared to mwo and no you have not been paying attention because pretty much all the teams in competitive are routing for a brawl other than on alpine. Can I ask who you play for and if you play anything other than open games?

1- I don't know who you are.

2- I don't play on the competitive scene (my schedule doesn't allow for it), but I do follow it. However, last time I checked, I didn't need to play professional football, to watch professional football.

3- I honestly can't think of a single FPS right now where they have different HPs for different sections. Yes, different body parts exist, but they all share one pool of health.

4- "routing for a brawl" ? Not familiar with the term.

[wanderer]

Quote

Let's just imagine that graph, applied to this game... even though this info is held like Fort Knox.

That I can do that with Hawken is why MWO will never be on Steam. PGI doesn't have the stones to actually display player counts lest someone else do what I have, only with them.

It's smart. PGI suffers from implication from lack of such data, but the real reason it doesn't is because providing such data would almost certainly be WORSE than blind guesses.

[P e n u m b r a]

IraqiWalker, on 05 August 2014 - 08:10 AM, said:

1- I don't know who you are.

2- I don't play on the competitive scene (my schedule doesn't allow for it), but I do follow it. However, last time I checked, I didn't need to play professional football, to watch professional football.

3- I honestly can't think of a single FPS right now where they have different HPs for different sections. Yes, different body parts exist, but they all share one pool of health.

4- "routing for a brawl" ? Not familiar with the term.

If you follow it how can you be so brutally oblivious to what's actually going on I dare you look at the games go type it in now 228 / swk / lords / sjr / gk go watch and tell me how many of those fights comes to a cluster ball brawl it is pretty much all of them! in other games that arguement is null the hp is not diff for each part but each part depletes the total health pool faster than other parts effectively killing what you shoot at faster thus rewards precision and pin point weapons you all have the same method of shooting so the issue is a l2p issue.

[ReXspec]

L e 0, on 05 August 2014 - 08:56 AM, said:

If you follow it how can you be so brutally oblivious to what's actually going on I dare you look at the games go type it in now 228 / swk / lords / sjr / gk go watch and tell me how many of those fights comes to a cluster ball brawl it is pretty much all of them!

You're delusional. I don't know what you classify as "brawling" but 100% of those matches started as "meta-jumper," long range, slug matches. Only about 2 out of 10 of those matches ever devolved into brawls below 320 meters (within AC-20 or UAC-20 effective ranges). Which is logical (in a "meta-humper," sort of way) because Meta-jumping/sniping is the lowest risk, highest reward strategy. I imagine any decent team who consist of human-beings with a frontal lobe would go with the strategy or build that is the lowest risk, and highest reward.

But that is apart of the problem. In mechwarrior THERE IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE any one dominant build or method. The meta in Mechwarrior is supposed to be teamwork and tactical flexibility. Not just knowing how to aim, and re-position.

L e 0, on 05 August 2014 - 08:56 AM, said:

in other games that arguement is null the hp is not diff for each part but each part depletes the total health pool faster than other parts effectively killing what you shoot at faster thus rewards precision and pin point weapons you all have the same method of shooting so the issue is a l2p issue.

Okay--put away your d*ck, L e 0. This isn't a d*ck-waving contest. Nobody cares who you are, nobody cares what team you're with. You and these teams are not God's gift to the Mechwarrior community because you and your posse are experts at Jump-sniping. To us, you are a regular player who is exceptional at using and exploiting a single aspect of gameplay and strategy--and refuse to address the issues around that said strategy.

I've played this game since I was about ten. The first Mechwarrior game I've ever played, in fact, was the Mechwarrior tabletop RPG. Then it was followed by MW2, MW2: M, MW3, MW3: PM, then MW4. Today, I'm in school for Game Design, and I've been a career beta and Q/A tester for a variety of developers.

You claim to know the full dynamics of this game, and claim to know what is best for the game based on what? Your tournament ratings? I hate to break it to ya, buddy, but, as I stated earlier, you and your ilk shouldn't be the supreme authority when it comes to balancing changes in this game. Not only because you lack experience and developmental knowledge of games, but because your perspective of gameplay strategy in Mechwarrior is exceedingly narrow.

Yeah, you and the clans like you are experts on jump-sniping, and high-damage, pinpoint alphas, but we're not asking advice on jump-sniping, or how to win tournaments. We KNOW those strategies and builds win games, we're discussing on how to change that, and balance that gameplay strategy along with other gameplay strategies and turn this into the rock-paper-scissor gameplay it's supposed to be, rather then have high-damage, pinpoint alphas be goddamn NUKES in the rock-paper-scissors game.

Edited by ReXspec, 05 August 2014 - 09:57 AM.

[ReXspec]

wanderer, on 05 August 2014 - 08:35 AM, said:

That I can do that with Hawken is why MWO will never be on Steam. PGI doesn't have the stones to actually display player counts lest someone else do what I have, only with them.

It's smart. PGI suffers from implication from lack of such data, but the real reason it doesn't is because providing such data would almost certainly be WORSE than blind guesses.

The problem with that is, if they intentionally leave player demographics OFF the table, then it doesn't lead to any sort of progress in game development. It just tunnels the game into what P.G.I. thinks Mechwarrior should be.

And if that's the case, then the forums are completely useless and they then become a placeholder to make the community think that the devs are listening.

Edited by ReXspec, 05 August 2014 - 09:52 AM.

[Steinkrieg]

Many people have said it more eloquently than I, so I will limit my response to voting to veto the whole inane and overly complicated concept.

[ReXspec]

Steinkrieg, on 05 August 2014 - 10:05 AM, said:

Many people have said it more eloquently than I, so I will limit my response to voting to veto the whole inane and overly complicated concept.

HEAR, HEAR!

[N Y G E N]

IraqiWalker, on 05 August 2014 - 08:10 AM, said:

2- I don't play on the competitive scene (my schedule doesn't allow for it), but I do follow it. However, last time I checked, I didn't need to play professional football, to watch professional football.

Interesting statement. Why people start to play football? Because they watch a match and want to try it. Does anybody who starts playing football complain about the difficulties? Does any newbies at football, does anybody from a football council come up with ideas to change the rules, even to make it easier for newbies?

Balancing have to be made from top to bottom. Collecting of datas to balance the game can only come from competitive games. Some suggestions in this thread might be good, some acceptably and some might be bad. But Mr. Inouye's are the worst!
Someone think brawling is impossible? It isn't. Someone think a Dire Whale is a problem? It is an oil-tanker and worth nothing without a team. Someone think PPC/Gauss, even pinpoint is the winner?
Is it really? Now, with fixed srm's, nerfed JJ, etc.?

PS: Football is a game where only the keeper may touch the ball with his hands. ^^ Example:

Edited by Nygen Claw, 05 August 2014 - 10:50 AM.

[P e n u m b r a]

ReXspec, on 05 August 2014 - 09:43 AM, said:

You're delusional. I don't know what you classify as "brawling" but 100% of those matches started as "meta-jumper," long range, slug matches. Only about 2 out of 10 of those matches ever devolved into brawls below 320 meters (within AC-20 or UAC-20 effective ranges). Which is logical (in a "meta-humper," sort of way) because Meta-jumping/sniping is the lowest risk, highest reward strategy. I imagine any decent team who consist of human-beings with a frontal lobe would go with the strategy or build that is the lowest risk, and highest reward.

But that is apart of the problem. In mechwarrior THERE IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE any one dominant build or method. The meta in Mechwarrior is supposed to be teamwork and tactical flexibility. Not just knowing how to aim, and re-position.


Okay--put away your d*ck, L e 0. This isn't a d*ck-waving contest. Nobody cares who you are, nobody cares what team you're with. You and these teams are not God's gift to the Mechwarrior community because you and your posse are experts at Jump-sniping. To us, you are a regular player who is exceptional at using and exploiting a single aspect of gameplay and strategy--and refuse to address the issues around that said strategy.

I've played this game since I was about ten. The first Mechwarrior game I've ever played, in fact, was the Mechwarrior tabletop RPG. Then it was followed by MW2, MW2: M, MW3, MW3: PM, then MW4. Today, I'm in school for Game Design, and I've been a career beta and Q/A tester for a variety of developers.

You claim to know the full dynamics of this game, and claim to know what is best for the game based on what? Your tournament ratings? I hate to break it to ya, buddy, but, as I stated earlier, you and your ilk shouldn't be the supreme authority when it comes to balancing changes in this game. Not only because you lack experience and developmental knowledge of games, but because your perspective of gameplay strategy in Mechwarrior is exceedingly narrow.

Yeah, you and the clans like you are experts on jump-sniping, and high-damage, pinpoint alphas, but we're not asking advice on jump-sniping, or how to win tournaments. We KNOW those strategies and builds win games, we're discussing on how to change that, and balance that gameplay strategy along with other gameplay strategies and turn this into the rock-paper-scissor gameplay it's supposed to be, rather then have high-damage, pinpoint alphas be goddamn NUKES in the rock-paper-scissors game.

How can you claim to know game design yet be clueless about the systems in it? Go watch it again its mostly ER medium lasers and auto cannon across the board I am talking entire team load outs here ER large / gauss / ppc / srm / auto cannons get a fair usage and showing in these matches its situational, for Christ sake watch and look at the configs!

Game design courses are about pushing a product these days, I am pretty sure every PGI employee has a better bit of paper than the little class you are doing provides yet here you sit trying to tell them how to make the game oh how ironic. most of the best games these days are made by gamers for gamers hence league of legends / CS etc its not about making mechwarrior into that game its just a mentality and direction that you just cannot seem to grasp.

Why do you think pin point is bad when everyone aims the same way and it has been fine for many other games? its completely fair all the weapon systems I listed have their uses you only experience one part of the game and that is an open que where yes gauss ppc in that situation is the better weapon but honestly you can roll them with lasers or fast srm trucks if you use it right and no its not more skilled to use those weapons either. I have played games competitively do you not think i fight against gauss ppc enough to know its limitations id wager my game knowledge surpasses yours in just play testing and understanding the game alone its my duty to find the strongest weapons theory and tactics in order to win games and I am telling you its actually a very thin line at the minute that's about to be completely thrown away.

You do realise how flawed a cone of fire system is right? Ill go ahead and point out the major flaw with your suggested system with the high time to kill we have in mwo it will promote getting right up close so the cone spread is minimized and proceeding to face plant into each other with high dps weapons that is just horrible.

Edited by L e 0, 05 August 2014 - 10:44 AM.

[Reno Blade]

Nygen Claw, on 05 August 2014 - 10:36 AM, said:

Interesting statement. Why people start to play football? Because they watch a match and want to try it. Does anybody who starts playing football complain about the difficulties? Does any newbies at football, does anybody from a football council come up with ideas to change the rules, even to make it easier for newbies?

Balancing have to be made from top to bottom. Collecting of datas to balance the game can only come from competitive games. Some suggestions in this thread might be good, some acceptably and some might be bad. But Mr. Inouye's are the worst!
Someone think brawling is impossible? It isn't. Someone think a Dire Whale is a problem? It is a oil-tanker and worth nothing without a team. Someone think PPC/Gauss, even pinpoint is the winner?
Is it really? Now, with fixed srm's, nerfed JJ, etc.?

With that logic, Paul give us the rules and we as the players should not complain, right?

I think all player type feedback need to be considered, but competitive players should not think they are something special because they can play by the curent rules.
Competitive players continually state they can adapt to changes and will "move on" to the next best meta, but how come they "cry" the loudest then?

Also if we consider something like 80% of the player base to be NON-competitive, we (or Paul) need to consider the impact to gameplay for this part of the playerbase and not only listen to the competitive 20%.
(numbers are rough estimates)

[P e n u m b r a]

Reno Blade, on 05 August 2014 - 10:46 AM, said:

With that logic, Paul give us the rules and we as the players should not complain, right?

I think all player type feedback need to be considered, but competitive players should not think they are something special because they can play by the curent rules.
Competitive players continually state they can adapt to changes and will "move on" to the next best meta, but how come they "cry" the loudest then?

Also if we consider something like 80% of the player base to be NON-competitive, we (or Paul) need to consider the impact to gameplay for this part of the playerbase and not only listen to the competitive 20%.
(numbers are rough estimates)

The numbers are only like that because all thats left is the diehard battletech guys the game has no pve its pvp so it should target that and thrive as a competitive game we need new players entering the game not people that have strong cognitive dissonance and use play for fun as coping mechanism because they feel entitled to be good at the game simply because they like the franchise if the game pulled in more players at least they would live in their under-dome ELO zone and they would be happy.