303 replies to this topic

[PhoenixFire55]

Not gonna play a game that tells me what I can play and what not.

[Redbackz]

GG PGI, does it make you feel powerful forcing people to play aspects of MWO they do not want?

Next you will enforce random chassis we drop in. Maybe random load outs too?

Feels like our only choice is how much money we spend.

[Kamies]

People suiciding because "matchmaker" does not help anyone, you silly sods!

[Carthoo]

Every one of you "happy" with the new MM, come to vote - and say clear and loud "NO!" to forced conquest!

http://mwomercs.com/...oting-poll-v20/

Vote is (god knows why) described badly, so "No" means "no" to the forced cq.

But funny how they still try to be sneaky with "improved elo" - which screwed me horribly in all my games yesterday.

[Iyica de Tylmarande]

Quote

• Trial 'Mechs now appear only in the Trial tab

The highlight of this patch for me. YUSSSSSSSSS!!!!!

On the downside the capture speed module is now a trash tier module.

Edited by Iyica de Tylmarande, 08 October 2014 - 02:03 AM.

[Captain Lactose]

POWR, on 07 October 2014 - 11:52 PM, said:

Game modes don't matter. Everything plays as skirmish in 90% of matches anyway. I have all 3 selected to get a match asap.

This is what I keep trying to tell people when they start moaning at the beginning of a match. I almost never play a conquest or assault match that comes down to the objectives anyway, so whats the big deal? No matter the game type, you can usually ( in my experience almost always, win it by simply playing it out like a skirmish game and killing everything that moves.

As for people who complain about 'having to play a match they do not want to' it is a social game, the majority of the people in a group will always choose the groups activities. The fact that you are sitting by yourself in a room with a computer does not change that there is a social group aspect to this activity.

My two cents.

Edited by Captain Lactose, 08 October 2014 - 02:18 AM.

[Steinar Bergstol]

BBP, on 07 October 2014 - 12:54 PM, said:

Until a while ago i had all 3 boxes checked. At some moment in a conquest mach i was in a assault and i asked for support , the reply was: this is conquest , just uncheck the box .After a few matches got the same reply...Baseline: conquest players are allone because of their attitude towards others(slow movers)...now we are forced to coap with that attitude !

'Lets all just try it out for a while and after some time'...already tried it...don't like being left behind !

That's not a conquest problem. That's a general arsehat problem where certain people are so obsessed about padding their kill counter by swarming a lagging assault/heavy on the other team that they don't give a damn about supporting their own assaults/heavies who in turn are swarmed by arsehats of a similar mindset on the other team. This leaves both teams down by their isolated assaults/heavies and neither team really gaining anything other than certain arsehats getting a warm, fuzzy feeling for being so awesome at gangbanging a lone mech and getting an extra kill on their counter. It's not exclusive to conquest and it never has been.

[Carthoo]

Captain Lactose, on 08 October 2014 - 02:07 AM, said:

This is what I keep trying to tell people when they start moaning at the beginning of a match. I almost never play a conquest or assault match that comes down to the objectives anyway, so whats the big deal? No matter the game type, you can usually ( in my experience almost always, win it by simply playing it out like a skirmish game and killing everything that moves.

As for people who complain about 'having to play a match they do not want to' it is a social game, the majority of the people in a group will always choose the groups activities. The fact that you are sitting by yourself in a room with a computer does not change that there is a social group aspect to this activity.

My two cents.

Bad two cents. With this opinion, you should start reporting people who are not smart to fight well and die early, leaving their team at disadvantage. Its a social game, where you choose what part of it you like. Also those smart saying, about winning conquest by annihilation - sure, but we, whale drivers, die first alone far away from team which left us and went full speed to cap/ hunt enemy light.

Or youd like to get in the restaurant, order coffe for 1,- and get a milk shake and cake for 10,-, coz "its social place and others voted you shall eat cake, drink milk and pay it all"???

------------------------

Also its not exclusive, at conquest - leaving assaults and heavies - but happens there every damn time, while in other two modes, people often realize they need the heavy punch and come to cover my assault under ECM, or at least give covering fire...

Edited by Carthoo, 08 October 2014 - 02:47 AM.

[Captain Lactose]

Carthoo, on 08 October 2014 - 02:42 AM, said:

Bad two cents.

Hmm I appreciate that you have decided that in addition to expressing your opinion, you are entitled to denigrate my politely expressed thoughts. So while I find your remarks offensive as well as rather dim, (please see why below), I will reply to your points in the manner of polite public debate.

Point: I agree that there are people who fail to grasp the stupidity of not ensuring their teams assault mechs live to reach the fight.

Point the Second: These people are not only found playing Assault or Conquest matches.

To repeat the salient points; assault mechs being left behind to die by faster mechs racing to the objectives is stupid and foolhardy yes, but it is not something that only happens in Conquest or assault. I play all the game modes, and it happens in them all, because stupidity or a lack of the least tactical acumen among players is not limited or determined by game type.
---------------------------------------------------------------
I do see that you partially acknowledged this in an edit after I read your post.
----------------------------------------------------------------
However I find the following fallacious:

Carthoo, on 08 October 2014 - 02:42 AM, said:

Or youd like to get in the restaurant, order coffe for 1,- and get a milk shake and cake for 10,-, coz "its social place and others voted you shall eat cake, drink milk and pay it all"???

The comparison is flawed beyond belief, this is a social game, you are entering it with the intent of playing a match with 23 other people. Dining in a restaurant is not a group social activity beyond the social unit you enter with, and the shared ambient experience all people in the same space share.

Edited by Captain Lactose, 08 October 2014 - 02:59 AM.

[Kjudoon]

Kamies, on 08 October 2014 - 01:20 AM, said:

People suiciding because "matchmaker" does not help anyone, you silly sods!

You're right. Everyone loses, but not for the reasons you imply because they're stupid and being brats, save for one. Entertainment is about pleasing oneself with a rewarding experience, whatever that may be.

You either going to lose players because:

- they get banned
- they quit

Why will they get banned? Simple. They'll quit/suicide and get reported and banned, making the public good will toxic over time and drive people who might have been interested away, because these people WILL talk, loudly on the forums. We've already seen evidence of this.

Why will they quit? Because they're not having fun and will leave to do something they DO have fun at. You cannot force people to have fun doing something they dislike. Particularly after you got them accustomed to having control over their situation. This is akin to like going to the movie theater, and then after your whole life of enjoying popcorn there, you can't because it's banned, but you can have kale, or fried tofu lumps... they're good for you! No thanks, I'm going to another theater, or wait for the DVD or find some other entertainment.

That's what this is doing.

That's basic human nature.

[Kjudoon]

Captain Lactose, on 08 October 2014 - 02:07 AM, said:

This is what I keep trying to tell people when they start moaning at the beginning of a match. I almost never play a conquest or assault match that comes down to the objectives anyway, so whats the big deal? No matter the game type, you can usually ( in my experience almost always, win it by simply playing it out like a skirmish game and killing everything that moves.

As for people who complain about 'having to play a match they do not want to' it is a social game, the majority of the people in a group will always choose the groups activities. The fact that you are sitting by yourself in a room with a computer does not change that there is a social group aspect to this activity.

My two cents.

And this is one of the many reasons why if this is your philosophy, stay in skirmish and quit bothering everyone who can think strategically, and I USED TO be able to stay out of that tacky little bloodbath, but now can't.

So now, I lost my social game because I don't wish to play with people like that, and cannot guarantee I don't have to associate with them. So I choose the last option left and 'opt out' of the game.

[Steinar Bergstol]

Baqa, on 07 October 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:

Yay for the clan heat penalty for the losing the side torso.hope they will later consider total mech destruction next time, only then will it be 'Balanced'

That's not going to happen. Extra heat is, in fact, correct according to the lore and Battletech rules as one of the strengths of Clan XL engines is that they can in fact survive the loss of a side torso without being completely destroyed, suffering instead severe heat penalties. The original rules are as follows:

Engines take 3 critical hits to destroy
1 crit adds 5 heat per turn
2 crits add 10 heat per turn
3 crits means the engine is destroyed.

Standard Engines have 6 critical slots, all located in the Center Torso. This means only CT hits can damage or destroy the engine.

Inner Sphere XL Engines have 6 extra critical slots, 3 in each side torso. On the destruction of a location all components in that location are destroyed, and as such an IS mech with XL engine which loses a side torso will suffer 3 engine crits, destroying the engine.

Clan XL Engines have only 4 extra critical slots, 2 in each side torso. As such the loss of a side torso will not destroy a Clan XL engine, but the mech will generate 10 points of extra heat each turn (which is quite significant in TableTop where these rules originated).

So extra heat for the loss of a side torso is correct according to how Clan engines are supposed to function, allowing them to survive the loss of the torso, but still suffer the intended heat penalties.

[anonymous161]

So mostly just another cash grab. Have yet to regret stop playing this regularly now it's almost never. I remember when this was my favorite game to play in my off hours now I barely ever think about playing it, and it's for all these pointless cash grabs for nothing of real value. Not a single penny I have ever spent feels like it was for anything good. Wish I could take back my clan purchase probably would have kept playing but the clans ended up ruining the game for me once they put that ridiculous nerf in.

[sabujo]

Baqa, on 07 October 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:

Yay for the clan heat penalty for the losing the side torso.hope they will later consider total mech destruction next time, only then will it be 'Balanced'

I disagree on that. Clans need to have that different aspect from inner sphere in order to keep their uniqueness and being more in line to the lore. However, since it only truly affects asymmetrical builds (where losing the shield side affects the weapons side), I totally favor a solution that decreases the mech speed and agility by 20%.

[Lukas von Seydlitz]

Really " Killing Blow " ???...whats next...." Monster Kill " etc. ????.....

Come on...it is BT and not an Robot-Arcade-3d Person-Shooter-Crap......

[Steinar Bergstol]

sabujo, on 08 October 2014 - 03:25 AM, said:

I disagree on that. Clans need to have that different aspect from inner sphere in order to keep their uniqueness and being more in line to the lore. However, since it only truly affects asymmetrical builds (where losing the shield side affects the weapons side), I totally favor a solution that decreases the mech speed and agility by 20%.

I'd rather see actual heatscale penalties than a hard decrease in speed and agility personally as that sort of system could then be applied to any situation where the mech is getting excessively hot, not just the loss of a side torso. Granted, such a system would affect me as well, unlike the current one, since I only run IS mechs, but that's okay by me because it would be correct according to the lore. I also think such a system would make band-**** like ghost heat redundant and make people far more vary of alpha striking all the time. I may be wrong (and it wouldn't be the first time), but that's my take on things at least.

[Carthoo]

Captain Lactose, on 08 October 2014 - 02:56 AM, said:

Hmm I appreciate that you have decided that in addition to expressing your opinion, you are entitled to denigrate my politely expressed thoughts. So while I find your remarks offensive as well as rather dim, (please see why below), I will reply to your points in the manner of polite public debate.

Point: I agree that there are people who fail to grasp the stupidity of not ensuring their teams assault mechs live to reach the fight.

Point the Second: These people are not only found playing Assault or Conquest matches.

To repeat the salient points; assault mechs being left behind to die by faster mechs racing to the objectives is stupid and foolhardy yes, but it is not something that only happens in Conquest or assault. I play all the game modes, and it happens in them all, because stupidity or a lack of the least tactical acumen among players is not limited or determined by game type.
---------------------------------------------------------------
I do see that you partially acknowledged this in an edit after I read your post.
----------------------------------------------------------------
However I find the following fallacious:



The comparison is flawed beyond belief, this is a social game, you are entering it with the intent of playing a match with 23 other people. Dining in a restaurant is not a group social activity beyond the social unit you enter with, and the shared ambient experience all people in the same space share.

No, its not. On both you get in on your free will. On both you loose your time and money to satisfy your hunger/ need to relax. And coz you are paying, you expect that youll get what you want. Getting something else and still have to pay? You will not come next time and you will try to a) rid the robber of money he got for giving you something you did not want Scream wft happened, so other people know.

But in simple way: I want to play chess, so why the heck are you givin me checkers?

[sabujo]

Darth Bane001, on 08 October 2014 - 03:20 AM, said:

So mostly just another cash grab. Have yet to regret stop playing this regularly now it's almost never. I remember when this was my favorite game to play in my off hours now I barely ever think about playing it, and it's for all these pointless cash grabs for nothing of real value. Not a single penny I have ever spent feels like it was for anything good. Wish I could take back my clan purchase probably would have kept playing but the clans ended up ruining the game for me once they put that ridiculous nerf in.

I really don't share your opinion. I purchased the Masakari collection (even though I am an IS player) and have mastered all its chassis. Now I am back to my IS mechs, and my conclusion is that clan mechs are, indeed, a bit more powerful than the rest. There are some exceptions, but the big dogs are just more effective and more tolerant to in-game player mistakes and sub-optimal builds.

This past weekend, after not getting the results I wanted for the challenge with my usual medium mechs (was just getting the 130 point 20 victories for the c-bill prize), I gave in and switched to my LRM Stalker. Got better, but not enough because of all the competition and kill steals, I was left many times at 120-ish points (or surpassing it and not winning). It was when I switched to my LRM Masakari that things turned around. Reaching 700+ damage was more than common, and kills just came up naturally. Less effort, higher gain.

And I am not even going to start talking on the Stormcrow, Daishi or Mad Cat. They need a little nerf there, and in my opinion we need a reduced speed/agility factor when side torso is destroyed to compensate for the fragility of IS mechs when sporting XL engines.

Steinar Bergstol, on 08 October 2014 - 03:34 AM, said:

I'd rather see actual heatscale penalties than a hard decrease in speed and agility personally as that sort of system could then be applied to any situation where the mech is getting excessively hot, not just the loss of a side torso. Granted, such a system would affect me as well, unlike the current one, since I only run IS mechs, but that's okay by me because it would be correct according to the lore. I also think such a system would make band-**** like ghost heat redundant and make people far more vary of alpha striking all the time. I may be wrong (and it wouldn't be the first time), but that's my take on things at least.

It is also a valid possibility. But for instance, I think one of the Mad Cat's bigger strengths is it's firepower to speed ratio. So we could mess up on DPS, yes, but messing up with speed would also level thing up. It would also, indirectly, buff medium mechs giving them a chance to fight back the clan heavies and assaults with their necessary hit and run tactics.

[That Dawg]

I LOVE that I can see ONLY my mechs. Holy crap initially I thought...ohnoes, wheres my mec...wait a minute, those ARE my mechs!! Bravo

LOVE that I can see what mechs I've researched in the past so that I might revisit some with more than 3 variants. NOTHING says go home like buying an assault you already bought when you're looking for a "new" ride.

seems the game is headed in the right direction...there, I said it.

[Deathlike]

Morang, on 07 October 2014 - 11:50 PM, said:

I don't understand why have you moved social window (friends/unit/notification) to the upper edge of the screen. I'm already accustomed to have it lower, why change? Besides, it increases mouse travel (as the button to open the social panel is at the LOWER edge of the screen).

This seems less obvious, as it allows for the "Faction window messages" to appear below the friends list.

Yea, go figure on that.