Hey Russ....
#21
Posted 09 October 2014 - 01:59 PM
If the population only kind of knows how Ghost Heat works but forgot why it was applied, they are going to vote on their intuition against Ghost Heat.
The Audience needs to be informed on the matter to vote wisely, otherwise Ride The Emotional-Band-Wagon.
Russ, stated that at the Time Ghost heat was exactly what people wanted, and he is right. Because Alpha Assaults online is freaking boring.
Back to the Start.
Find a better Solution that Replaces Ghost heat, and Russ said and is willing to talk about the mechanics of said solution. Until then Keep Ghost Heat in the Game, until Heat Thresholds and Heat system is Reworked entirely.
#22
Posted 09 October 2014 - 02:03 PM
They could of course invent a mechanic that prevents a Mech to fire more than 1, 2, 4 or 8 Weapons (Heavy,Medium, Light and Fluff Damage aka 20, 9 to 15, 5 to 8 and below 5 damage) at the same time...Alpha Strikes are allowed but at the expense of 10% damage to the Internal Structure and a Crit Failure Chance.
Edited by Thorqemada, 09 October 2014 - 02:03 PM.
#23
Posted 09 October 2014 - 02:09 PM
#24
Posted 09 October 2014 - 02:11 PM
#25
Posted 09 October 2014 - 02:17 PM
im happy that it is here. people have to think about what they do.
nova with 12 med lasers? why does it have so many? simple. it has 2 arms, one gets blown off. still has 6.
are mechs like that supposed to alpha? nope. never. and never conisdered to do alpha's.
in case one laser fails or gets destroyed, turn it off, still has plenty.
loadouts were made to be useful on open battlefield and you cant compare a open battlefiled with long runs away from any repairs with this game.
Edited by Aliisa White, 09 October 2014 - 02:18 PM.
#26
Posted 09 October 2014 - 02:30 PM
Savage Wolf, on 09 October 2014 - 05:00 AM, said:
So until such a time as players all know game design, don't ask difficult questions like these.
And it seems Russ or Niko needs some reading up on user test and how to do and read them.
There are many reasons why ghost heat is bad, but you are right, most people are not qualified to understand the ramifications of the entire system.
Listen to those who provide well thought out critical suggestions and critiques and make the best decisions from that. However its really about asking the community about problem solving.
"Do you want to reduce the alpha damage and make firing smaller groups of weapons in different situations more desirable?"
There are many ways to do this but most of the community would say yes - just the way you go about it needs to be more palatable and you will never please everyone with the solution.
The major issue i have seen is that after weeks of really interesting well through out suggestions PGI often come in with 2 choices - both being bad, none of which were really inspired from the more thoughtful ideas from the community.
Democracy only works if people are educated enough on the topics, and there are clear and and unbias avenues of communication. We have issues with both communications and education - both things that PGI can improve upon
#27
Posted 09 October 2014 - 02:44 PM
Xanquil, on 09 October 2014 - 02:09 PM, said:
I'd rather keep precision and reduce alpha. Lets people that can aim hit stuff at distance without RNG.
Like how stuff is at the moment.
To the guy above, I can't think of any community suggestion that has been outright better, often they are worse, convoluted, or pointless. See below (all examples pulled from just the first page!)
http://mwomercs.com/...mo-and-c-bills/
http://mwomercs.com/...en-out-of-hand/
http://mwomercs.com/...point-revision/
http://mwomercs.com/...pdate-about-cw/
http://mwomercs.com/...breaking-cheat/
Edited by MoonfireSpam, 09 October 2014 - 02:48 PM.
#29
Posted 09 October 2014 - 03:16 PM
Lord de Seis, on 09 October 2014 - 05:39 AM, said:
Quad PPC at nerf speeds....there is no escape from the Quad Laser...
#30
Posted 09 October 2014 - 03:20 PM
Alright, cool. How are you going to maintain balance, exactly?
#31
Posted 09 October 2014 - 03:38 PM
Nicolai Kabrinsky, on 09 October 2014 - 03:20 PM, said:
Alright, cool. How are you going to maintain balance, exactly?
The excuse those people give is that all mechs should be viable and balanced ... but mainly because they just like taking a single type of mech.
If they were all balanced and lights were picking them apart then you would see them change their tune
I do understand people wanting to play a preferred style, being able to mix weights between people and assign mechs for the drop deck as a team is admirable, but it is a LOT of extra time and effort for a team, and then putting smaller groups togetehr would be a nightmare - its just not feasible.
I do hope a dropship mode is available in private matches though and it can be applied across an entire team not just individuals there for player run leagues etc
#32
Posted 09 October 2014 - 03:40 PM
The game has to be fun, or new players will stop playing it.
This is a weary argument, but I'll restate it because people fail at history.
MechWarrior 4 Mercs multiplayer, was a forgettable easily forgotten feature.
Why?
Because even though there were hard point size limitations and weapon tonnage limits. It still turned into PPC Assault mechs online.
People slowly stopped playing, because the Assault pilots did not want to stop playing their assaults.
while other people wanted something new fresh and different.
Hence, MW4 Merc Multiplayer died painfully, and slowly, and soon Assault pilots could not find a server to join.
Do you want that to happen in MWO?
No.
So the temporary solution remains. Ghost Heat until something better is analyzed and cross analyzed.
Edited by Timuroslav, 09 October 2014 - 03:42 PM.
#34
Posted 10 October 2014 - 05:05 AM
Thorqemada, on 09 October 2014 - 02:03 PM, said:
They could of course invent a mechanic that prevents a Mech to fire more than 1, 2, 4 or 8 Weapons (Heavy,Medium, Light and Fluff Damage aka 20, 9 to 15, 5 to 8 and below 5 damage) at the same time...Alpha Strikes are allowed but at the expense of 10% damage to the Internal Structure and a Crit Failure Chance.
how about an automatic shut down..... definitely a risk reward situation....
Fut, on 09 October 2014 - 03:43 PM, said:
A giraffe is a horse designed by a committee...
also has access to a wider range in food sources.
#35
Posted 10 October 2014 - 05:10 AM
Xarian, on 09 October 2014 - 07:16 AM, said:
This is very true and a good idea. And then just Release them by Place 1 to x.
#36
Posted 10 October 2014 - 05:17 AM
Timuroslav, on 09 October 2014 - 01:59 PM, said:
If the population only kind of knows how Ghost Heat works but forgot why it was applied, they are going to vote on their intuition against Ghost Heat.
The Audience needs to be informed on the matter to vote wisely, otherwise Ride The Emotional-Band-Wagon.
Russ, stated that at the Time Ghost heat was exactly what people wanted, and he is right. Because Alpha Assaults online is freaking boring.
Back to the Start.
Find a better Solution that Replaces Ghost heat, and Russ said and is willing to talk about the mechanics of said solution. Until then Keep Ghost Heat in the Game, until Heat Thresholds and Heat system is Reworked entirely.
this implies people would understand the explanaition and jusge objectively. But many do actually not understand the issue, and /or asnwer subjectively to their favor.
yes/no answers are anways not good, you need:
yes
no
im fine with both
I am against both
Thsi way you get a better idea about howmany poeple will be affected negatively/positively by a change.
Edited by Lily from animove, 10 October 2014 - 05:18 AM.
#37
Posted 10 October 2014 - 06:08 AM
#38
Posted 10 October 2014 - 07:20 AM
they cant even mount the weaponamount do produce ghost heat most of time >_>
lights and meds got another problem.
ghost heat aint one of it.
6 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users