220 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

I miss the days when we had a sliver of hope that ECM/Radar/LRM mechanics might one day be changed.....

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 23 March 2015 - 11:49 AM.

[EvilCow]

Even hope dies eventually.

[Bishop Steiner]

WM Quicksilver, on 23 March 2015 - 11:49 AM, said:

I miss the days when we had a sliver of hope that ECM/Radar/LRM mechanics might one day be changed.....

EvilCow, on 23 March 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:

Even hope dies eventually.

or maybe the community did what Russ expected, and couldn't get past their own petty squabbles and infighting, cults of personality and butthurt saboteurs to put together a reasonable front with reasonable proposals?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 23 March 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

or maybe the community did what Russ expected, and couldn't get past their own petty squabbles and infighting, cults of personality and butthurt saboteurs to put together a reasonable front with reasonable proposals?

To expect that would be a failure to understand how communities work in the first place, even bad ideas such as P2W mechanics can have droves of supporters. There were plenty of good proposals, the problem was that PGI never will see the problem with ECM so why would they bother making an effort fixing something they didn't see as broken.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 23 March 2015 - 01:10 PM.

[Telmasa]

Patience and determination; long as we keep hammering the same points, I imagine they'll get addressed.

[EvilCow]

Bishop Steiner, on 23 March 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

or maybe the community did what Russ expected, and couldn't get past their own petty squabbles and infighting, cults of personality and butthurt saboteurs to put together a reasonable front with reasonable proposals?

A reasonable proposal is right at beginning of this thread, there is also plenty positive feedback from the community.

What is missing is acknowledge and commitment from PGI in really fixing their stuff, there has never been willingness to fix ECM nor other mechanics, it was a travesty since beginning.

Edited by EvilCow, 23 March 2015 - 11:37 PM.

[El Bandito]

Bishop Steiner, on 23 March 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

or maybe the community did what Russ expected, and couldn't get past their own petty squabbles and infighting, cults of personality and butthurt saboteurs to put together a reasonable front with reasonable proposals?

Come now, that's just an excuse for PGI. Reasonable proposals were a plenty. It was simply more profitable for PGI to expose some dissenters and do nothing about it as the result.

[Bishop Steiner]

EvilCow, on 23 March 2015 - 11:36 PM, said:

A reasonable proposal is right at beginning of this thread, there is also plenty positive feedback from the community.

What is missing is acknowledge and commitment from PGI in really fixing their stuff, there has never been willingness to fix ECM nor other mechanics, it was a travesty since beginning.

a reasonable proposal needed to be backed by a larger part of the community, and be simple to implement. Regardless of my opinion of the OP; the "community" backed part never happened. But by all means, wear rose colored glasses about the mess that was happening during the time this proposal was made. The community couldn't even agree as to who, or what to push and present to PGI as it's proposal.

[DaZur]

Patterned history of anything decided by committee is destine to fail... The entire premise of this threads proposal and the absolute failure to come to consensus is proof positive of that.

FWIW, being one of those guys who actually desire higher fidelity and stronger sim elements... I was in support of his presented ideas. IMHO, this community killed any chance of this ever even being considered due to the in-fighting and derision leveled.

[Bishop Steiner]

DaZur, on 24 March 2015 - 07:51 AM, said:

Patterned history of anything decided by committee is destine to fail... The entire premise of this threads proposal and the absolute failure to come to consensus is proof positive of that.

FWIW, being one of those guys who actually desire higher fidelity and stronger sim elements... I was in support of his presented ideas. IMHO, this community killed any chance of this ever even being considered due to the in-fighting and derision leveled.

but it's easier to simply point fingers and say "PGI!!!!".


PGI is culpable of many things. Our own stiff necked community intransigence is not one of them.

[Nayru]

In retrospect I find it kind of amusing this guy basically suggested that any light in the open for over a second would get locked regardless of radar, and take a mech's full onslaught of LRMs, no matter where they went or if they broke sight or not.

Also known as STREAK LRMs.

[Sarlic]

WM Quicksilver, on 23 March 2015 - 11:49 AM, said:

I miss the days when we had a sliver of hope that ECM/Radar/LRM mechanics might one day be changed.....

Minimal viable product.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 March 2015 - 06:32 AM, said:

a reasonable proposal needed to be backed by a larger part of the community, and be simple to implement. Regardless of my opinion of the OP; the "community" backed part never happened. But by all means, wear rose colored glasses about the mess that was happening during the time this proposal was made. The community couldn't even agree as to who, or what to push and present to PGI as it's proposal.

That is the problem though, expecting the community to approve of an implementation with the majority is doomed to failure. Even the most egregious of faults have had significant white knighting within this community. The problem is that PGI never found a problem with the current mechanics and thus were never really interested in fixing it. Hell, look at how many gauss threads pop-up because of the charge up even though it is still one of the best ballistics in the game. How many threads do we have going about JJs needing a change because they are pathetic and only useful for bunny-hopping? How long did it take us to get decent wubwub improvements (this one didn't even have significant backing)?

It's easy to put the blame on the community too, the problem was with PGI on this one, the community had a couple of great ideas floating around this forum just like this thread. This is their game, all we can do is make suggestions and hope PGI actually agrees and makes an effort to rectify the problem. This isn't a democracy, the majority only helps lend credibility to an issue, it does not however guarantee change.

[DaZur]

Sarlic, on 24 March 2015 - 10:17 AM, said:

Minimal viable product.

Vass'ism
verb (used without object)

1. To be critical in regards ro MW:O in a rude or sarcastic way using a single ill-defined sentence:

noun
2. Unnecessarily rude or sarcastic criticism in regards to MW:O or PGI.

• MW:O community derision is fueled mostly by Vass'isms and rumors.
  
• Please try doing this without listing all the reasons why you do not believe and without a offering a Vass'ism.

Word Origin and History for Vass






n.

A cultist leader of self-appointed members of the greater MW:O community and Reddit intelligentsia who uses one paragraph witty "zingers" to demonstrate higher knowledge and superiority as a means to demean and otherwise denigrate MW:O, PGI and or the opposing community who as a whole are not offended by publicly proclaiming "MW:O isn't so bad".

Edited by DaZur, 24 March 2015 - 10:48 AM.

[Mechteric]

EvilCow, on 23 March 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:

Even hope dies eventually.

Hope didn't die, it just moved on to play other games that were more fun. Hope can return to MWO, but that's entirely up to the developers to do the right thing *wink * wink * nudge * nudge*

[EvilCow]

CapperDeluxe, on 24 March 2015 - 11:53 AM, said:

Hope didn't die, it just moved on to play other games that were more fun. Hope can return to MWO, but that's entirely up to the developers to do the right thing *wink * wink * nudge * nudge*

Don't tell me My remaining 2015 gaming budget just went into backing "Descent Underground", looks very promising. I hope they reach the goal.

[GeneralArmchair]

Here's my take for indirect lrm fire.
1:  indirect fire is not possible against non-los radar-only locks.
2:  if a friendly mech has targeted an enemy AND has line of sight to the enemy, then indirect fire is possible with a missile grouping penalty.
3:  if a friendly is tagging the target, then indirect fire with a tighter grouping is possible.
4:  if the enemy has been narced, then indirect fire is possible (ecm field jams narcs)

Edit:
Whoops. Didn't realize how old they thread was. Yeah, pgi intent was to distract everyone until they could brush it under the rug again.

The ecm problem will rise to the forefront once again. It just needs to become more oppressive and omnipresent on the battlefield first. Clan wave 3 is a huge step in that direction. The expected IS ecm heavy will be another step. Eventually pgi 's hand will be forced and they will need to re-evaluate the jesus box.

Edited by GeneralArmchair, 24 March 2015 - 01:52 PM.

[Funkmaster Rick]

Roland, sir, you have good ideas, an analytical mind, and the propriety to post it in a well-organized format. I'm glad someone necro'd this thread; it was worth the read.

On the off chance you're still reading this thread from time to time, I'd like to get your thoughts on the following:

What if LRMs had a much larger spread upon impact than the do now? What if their spread increased over distances such that a 1000m-shot by 20 tubes spread over a region of about 200m? And the spread was manipulated by factors such as Artemis (and direct LOS to a lesser extent), NARC, TAG, and the such? If a "blind" LRM volley was a low-damage, wide-area carpet, but could be buffed up to current levels of precision (or beyond, as appropriate) with spotters, systems, or better targeting data?

[Bishop Steiner]

DaZur, on 24 March 2015 - 10:44 AM, said:

Vass'ism
verb (used without object)

1. To be critical in regards ro MW:O in a rude or sarcastic way using a single ill-defined sentence:

noun
2. Unnecessarily rude or sarcastic criticism in regards to MW:O or PGI.

• MW:O community derision is fueled mostly by Vass'isms and rumors.
  
• Please try doing this without listing all the reasons why you do not believe and without a offering a Vass'ism.

Word Origin and History for Vass







n.

A cultist leader of self-appointed members of the greater MW:O community and Reddit intelligentsia who uses one paragraph witty "zingers" to demonstrate higher knowledge and superiority as a means to demean and otherwise denigrate MW:O, PGI and or the opposing community who as a whole are not offended by publicly proclaiming "MW:O isn't so bad".

have you submitted this to Urban Dictionary yet?

[Goombah]

Roland cards more about the well being and fun of this game than most game developers. I rarely fully agree with anyone when it comes to game balance. If this came to pass I would be fully satisfied that things are going inthd right direction.
The hard counters need to stop.
If 99.9% of your player base is using something (radar dep, seismic) its too powerful, should be removed, or should be made integrated and universal for all mechs.
While at it, reduce ecm range to 50m or so, let ANY MECH USE ECM and give dedicated ecm-carriers (hellbringer) +300% range. Balance the ECM carriers accordingly, people will still use them without being cooreced into it by the meta.
All or nothing, binary balancing is stupid and needlessly difficult in the extreme.