373 replies to this topic

[Pjwned]

Mystere, on 09 November 2014 - 05:27 PM, said:

For many people here, the word "artillery" means something. Some have gone though it and lived to tell a tale. Some have used it and know very well the havoc they create. And some know exactly what they are capable of because they have been involved in designing them.

As such, in a game that has something called "artillery" in it, there are people here who expect it to be "Artillery!". The only semblance of "balance" required is that it is available to everyone.

I don't really see how your real life experience with artillery gives you (or anybody else) any more credibility about dictating how artillery should function in a video game. Also, balance is not solely achieved by making it available to everybody, see: pop tart jump sniping before it received numerous (justified) nerfs.

Quote

I don't think anyone is arguing against not making its use more "skillful". It's the damage they do that is in question.

I wasn't saying that anybody (I'm aware of) is arguing to make it less skillful, I was saying that I agree it should be more "skillful" and I also think it should have its damage per shell reduced; if it's not already clear I am also arguing that the total number of shells should be increased so that its total damage potential stays high.

Quote

See above.

Also, you missed my point entirely. I was specifically talking about someone already very close to death complaining about being killed by artillery.

I don't see how I did anything but hit your point directly, my point is you seem to be using that 1 instance of somebody complaining as an excuse to not change anything because "people will complain about anything" blah blah blah, not a good argument; why else do you bring it up if that's not your point?

Quote

And I want artillery to be deadly because that is a sure way of making them totally feared in this game. It is precisely that fear that I am counting on to "motivate" the enemy to do what I want.

Heck these days, when I am in a heavy or assault, I will just barrel through the red smoke if I ever see one. And in the weeks I have been doing this, I recall being killed by artillery only once. And this happened only a few days ago and my mech was already heavily damaged. As such, it was no big deal as far as I am concerned.

It can still be deadly without RNG instant kill shots.

Edited by Pjwned, 10 November 2014 - 06:04 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

QuantumButler, on 09 November 2014 - 12:41 PM, said:

Games, however, should be fun, not hell.

But fun is not the same for everyone.

If a Match can make me think, "Oh CRAP I'M GOING TO DIE!!!"

That is a good game.

If the game can make me go, "What the HECK was that that hit me?"

That is also a good game.

When I can wade into the enemy and stumble out broken and battered with 3 kills and 7 assists mumbling "brutal" That is a good game.

Good and Fun for me may not be good and fun for you.

[Telmasa]

WarHippy, on 09 November 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

This is wrong. Knowing when and where to place the strike does add to the flow of the game. It also adds to the skill of the game as it requires people to be more aware of their surroundings, which can only been seen as a plus.

How does it possibly add to the flow of a game? Its does the exact OPPOSITE of that - it disrupts the flow, it doesn't enhance it in the slightest.

There is absolutely nothing involving skill with pressing a single button, aiming ONE time during a match, or being on the receiving end, seeing the smoke, and either luckily being in a light mech or resigning yourself to your fate.

Nothing involving air or artillery strikes, on the sending or receiving end, has anything to do with increasing awareness of surroundings - in fact, it decreases awareness, because that smoke often obscures vision (if you can see it at all), the resulting strikes are overwhelmingly disorienting when they hit, and they completely distract you from the enemy that's likely engaging you face to face at exactly the same time.

The only way it can be seen as a "plus" is if you make a habit out of abusing it for the gimmick that it is.

Quote

We don't want a generic shooter. If this was just another mind numbing shooter our time and money could be well spent somewhere else where they did it better.

Strawman argument.

Quote

Strikes are fair and balanced, but I'm curious what these other fun challenges are? Keep in mind fun is subjective, and what you assume is fun isn't for someone else much like how strikes are not fun for you but are for others.

There is nothing fair or balanced about it - excepting the *one* virtue it has, that everyone has equal access to it. That is the ONE characteristic about it that could possibly fit the definitions of "fair" or "balanced" as taken from any gamer's dictionary.

Alot of people on the internet play games and have "fun" by purposefully making full use of 'meta' gimmicks and tricks to achieve overwhelming, unfair advantages over unassuming opponents - the same mindset behind hackers and cheaters that led to the death of games like CounterStrike.
That does not make such selfish interpretations of "fun" justifiable in the slightest.

Quote

It does. It can only be used one time, it isn't accurate(damage is spread all over a large area), and as you said the price of it. On top of that no other weapon needs to be purchased again and again to keep using it, nor does any other weapon require a GXP investment to be brought to mild-moderate usefulness.

Wrong again. It can be used up to 12 times per match. (that's 2520 to 4200 potential damage, by the way). The inaccuracy of it is irrelevant, given the splash radius generally makes up for it; no, all that damage is unlikely to be completely focused on a single mech, but it's even odds that at least half that potential damage WILL hit the mech that it was targeted against (again assuming it was properly aimed, not hard to accomplish at all), and it's very likely to hit more than a few mechs that weren't specifically targeted.

It has no tonnage increase.
It carries no heat penalties.
It carries no additional requirements for ammo, case, or heatsinks.
It does not affect the performance of your mech whatsoever.

Every other weapon system in the game carries at least some of these drawbacks.

You're also wrong about the GXP, every single weapon now has a "module" available for research that significantly increases its effectiveness, and in fact, most have at least *two*. The only point I will grant you is that none of them would fully add up to the 15,000 GXP needed for the "advanced" strike modules.

Quote

It is so why keep complaining?

Repetition of strawman logic is a self-fulfilling fallacy.

Edited by Telmasa, 10 November 2014 - 01:22 PM.

[Telmasa]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 November 2014 - 06:12 AM, said:

But fun is not the same for everyone.
If a Match can make me think, "Oh CRAP I'M GOING TO DIE!!!"
That is a good game.
If the game can make me go, "What the HECK was that that hit me?"
That is also a good game.
When I can wade into the enemy and stumble out broken and battered with 3 kills and 7 assists mumbling "brutal" That is a good game.
Good and Fun for me may not be good and fun for you.

And I argue that those exact games are perfectly possible while balancing air & artillery strikes to be fair to ALL players, instead of only to those players who accept its use as a wholesale, zero-drawbacks, near-instant-damage addition to their gameplay.

I would even go further to say that those games would have exactly the same potential to be just as exciting, and fun, even if artillery and air strikes didn't exist altogether.

[Mystere]

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

Nothing involving air or artillery strikes, on the sending or receiving end, has anything to do with increasing awareness of surroundings - in fact, it decreases awareness, because that smoke often obscures vision (if you can see it at all), the resulting strikes are overwhelmingly disorienting when they hit, and they completely distract you from the enemy that's likely engaging you face to face at exactly the same time.

Either you are being extremely "creative", or you did not understand what WarHippy said:

WarHippy, on 09 November 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

This is wrong. Knowing when and where to place the strike does add to the flow of the game. It also adds to the skill of the game as it requires people to be more aware of their surroundings, which can only been seen as a plus.

On second thought, lol on that "creative" part.

[Kain Demos]

TwentyOne, on 05 November 2014 - 08:39 PM, said:

In pug queue when it is dropped behind you, no you don't.
Honestly though in Teamspeak I do much better, as people call airstrike out and I can move instantly, but otherwise in a pug game in an assault, you will be hit by an airstrike pretty much guaranteed

I've been hit with as many as 4 in a match in my Dire Wolf. I hate when you're brawling with someone too and they get one off right before they die because they know they've lost and get in some last cheap shots.

[Chemie]

I would pay 40k CB for a consumable which cancelled the damn arty strike. Games with 24 bombs going off is stupid. Ruins the game IMHO.

OK PGI...give us "radio intercept" for 40,000CB which we can pop as soon as smoke is seen.

[WarHippy]

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

How does it possibly add to the flow of a game? Its does the exact OPPOSITE of that - it disrupts the flow, it doesn't enhance it in the slightest.

By disrupting the flow it actually enhances the gameplay by making it more dynamic. If everyone is just running around in a giant death ball dropping some strikes can help reset the momentum in the game. It makes for a more organic match, and that is something many want.

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

There is absolutely nothing involving skill with pressing a single button, aiming ONE time during a match, or being on the receiving end, seeing the smoke, and either luckily being in a light mech or resigning yourself to your fate.

Knowing when and where to place them for maximum effect is a skill. As is being aware of your own surroundings so as to avoid being a target, and knowing it is time to move when you are a target. As for the exaggeration about only lights being "lucky" enough to avoid them when all mechs are capable all I can say is nice False Dilemma fallacy.

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

Nothing involving air or artillery strikes, on the sending or receiving end, has anything to do with increasing awareness of surroundings - in fact, it decreases awareness, because that smoke often obscures vision (if you can see it at all), the resulting strikes are overwhelmingly disorienting when they hit, and they completely distract you from the enemy that's likely engaging you face to face at exactly the same time.

The smoke is blocking your view? I guess it shouldn't be too hard to know it is time to move if it is so in your face that it is blinding you. Is the distraction of it hitting you really an issue when engaging an enemy face to face? I mean if you are face to face wouldn't he be getting hit as well, or do you mean face to face as in you both see each other while trading blows at 600m? Either way I'm not seeing the issue as it doesn't really interfere that much with aim, and does nothing to stop you from moving in whatever direction you choose.

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

The only way it can be seen as a "plus" is if you make a habit out of abusing it for the gimmick that it is.

The amount of fallacies that apply to this statement is impressive.

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

Strawman argument.

Are we really going to play this game?

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

There is nothing fair or balanced about it - excepting the *one* virtue it has, that everyone has equal access to it. That is the ONE characteristic about it that could possibly fit the definitions of "fair" or "balanced" as taken from any gamer's dictionary.

That "ONE characteristic" is all that really matters as everything else is subjective.

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

Alot of people on the internet play games and have "fun" by purposefully making full use of 'meta' gimmicks and tricks to achieve overwhelming, unfair advantages over unassuming opponents - the same mindset behind hackers and cheaters that led to the death of games like CounterStrike.

Are you really suggesting people that use meta builds and/or in game items in their intended roll are at some sort of unfair advantage and therefore cheaters? False Equivalence fallacy right there. I'm having a really hard time taking you seriously right now.
As for Counter-Strike people still play it and its other versions, and while it isn't as popular as it once was keep in mind its 15 years old.

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

That does not make such selfish interpretations of "fun" justifiable in the slightest.

Moral high ground fallacy.

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

Wrong again. It can be used up to 12 times per match. (that's 2520 to 4200 potential damage, by the way). The inaccuracy of it is irrelevant, given the splash radius generally makes up for it; no, all that damage is unlikely to be completely focused on a single mech, but it's even odds that at least half that potential damage WILL hit the mech that it was targeted against (again assuming it was properly aimed, not hard to accomplish at all), and it's very likely to hit more than a few mechs that weren't specifically targeted.

I was talking about strikes as an individual player not as a group, but yes the team can use up to 12 per match for a potential 0-4200 damage. The fact that it can miss means inaccuracy is relevant. You may not agree, but you don't get to just hand wave the inconvenient parts of the big picture.

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

You're also wrong about the GXP, every single weapon now has a "module" available for research that significantly increases its effectiveness, and in fact, most have at least *two*. The only point I will grant you is that none of them would fully add up to the 15,000 GXP needed for the "advanced" strike modules.

I only use modules on a few of my mechs as they are expensive for the small bonus they provide. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Mainhunter]

Chemie, on 10 November 2014 - 02:25 PM, said:

I would pay 40k CB for a consumable which cancelled the damn arty strike. Games with 24 bombs going off is stupid. Ruins the game IMHO.

OK PGI...give us "radio intercept" for 40,000CB which we can pop as soon as smoke is seen.

This doesn't reflect the reality, I see max 4-5 Arty strikes the hole game.

[QuantumButler]

Mainhunter, on 10 November 2014 - 09:02 PM, said:

This doesn't reflect the reality, I see max 4-5 Arty strikes the hole game.

Then you only play in the pug queue, if you're in the group queue you can regularly expect to see up to 12 smokes dropped on your team.

[R Razor]

Pjwned, on 10 November 2014 - 03:22 AM, said:

I don't really see how your real life experience with artillery gives you (or anybody else) any more credibility about dictating how artillery should function in a video game. Also, balance is not solely achieved by making it available to everybody, see: pop tart jump sniping before it received numerous (justified) nerfs.



I wasn't saying that anybody (I'm aware of) is arguing to make it less skillful, I was saying that I agree it should be more "skillful" and I also think it should have its damage per shell reduced; if it's not already clear I am also arguing that the total number of shells should be increased so that its total damage potential stays high.



I don't see how I did anything but hit your point directly, my point is you seem to be using that 1 instance of somebody complaining as an excuse to not change anything because "people will complain about anything" blah blah blah, not a good argument; why else do you bring it up if that's not your point?



It can still be deadly without RNG instant kill shots.

We get it, arty or an air strike touched you in your bad place...........file a complaint to MWOsupport, you'll get farther than you will crying in here.

[Pjwned]

R Razor, on 10 November 2014 - 10:02 PM, said:

We get it, arty or an air strike touched you in your bad place...........file a complaint to MWOsupport, you'll get farther than you will crying in here.

If you don't have an argument then you don't need to post anything.

[QuantumButler]

R Razor, on 10 November 2014 - 10:02 PM, said:

We get it, arty or an air strike touched you in your bad place...........file a complaint to MWOsupport, you'll get farther than you will crying in here.

Clearly, you've never contacted MWO support before to have such faith in them.

[Marvyra]

Yup, I fully agree, airstrikes/arts should just either be nerfed or removed all together. They just add frustration to the game imo. It's nice coming back to MWO and seeing that pop-tarting is almost entirely gone but what is this red smoke? Oh.. that just blew off half my mech when I wasn't even damaged.

[Ace Selin]

Instead of having mechs fighting mechs this game is about guiding artillery and plane strikes onto target - Mech Warrior Online should be about killing and dying to mechs, not arty/airstrikes.

[Griffin Talon]

First off I havnt read all of this nor is this a reply to any one in particular

Arty is fine, airstrike is fine, espcially now that you can only carry one not both so there is a limit of 12, a slight increase in cooldown and/or longer deploy time? maybe.

arty/airstrike spam? players will use whatever they can to get a win/kill if it be a single target, which is a waste of strike or on a blob to cause confusing and damage.

Question what is the main issue people are having??? going into a firefight then getting hit by a strike you dont see? having a limb knocked off?? getting targeted becuase you in a blob??

If there was no arty then I wouldnt of got an awsome double kill on a light and a med(or light) that was chasing me and a mate into the cave on the snow map with the crashed dropship.

Be fun if the devs added aerospace fighter support

I vote for elementals and myrmidons!

[Joseph Mallan]

Ace Selin, on 11 November 2014 - 02:56 AM, said:

Instead of having mechs fighting mechs this game is about guiding artillery and plane strikes onto target - Mech Warrior Online should be about killing and dying to mechs, not arty/airstrikes.

Yeah cause I have died 2 whole times from Air/Arty since its been put into play. It's so Overpowered and so easy to use I hardly ever die to it.

[Joseph Mallan]

Telmasa, on 10 November 2014 - 01:26 PM, said:

And I argue that those exact games are perfectly possible while balancing air & artillery strikes to be fair to ALL players, instead of only to those players who accept its use as a wholesale, zero-drawbacks, near-instant-damage addition to their gameplay.

I would even go further to say that those games would have exactly the same potential to be just as exciting, and fun, even if artillery and air strikes didn't exist altogether.

So my not using it and still thinking its perfectly fine with its use and power doesn't mean a thing? I like it as is all while it IS raining on me. Most the games I paraphrased in my above posts were reactions to weapons fire, not Arty. My normal Arty reactions are, "Smoke! gotta boogie... Missed me" or "Awww, I didn't see that one coming...70% armor left, K. ALPHA, ALPHA, cool down ALPHA ALPHA cool down"

QuantumButler, on 10 November 2014 - 09:37 PM, said:

Then you only play in the pug queue, if you're in the group queue you can regularly expect to see up to 12 smokes dropped on your team.

And 8-11 missing cause communication is so helpful getting out of a blast area.

[QuantumButler]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 November 2014 - 04:39 AM, said:

Yeah cause I have died 2 whole times from Air/Arty since its been put into play. It's so Overpowered and so easy to use I hardly ever die to it.

You're obviously playing some crazy bizzarro version of the game because what you claim to see has very little baring on what most of us are seeing.

[Masterrix]

arty-whiners


how many arty "kills" do we see ingame ?

1 in 3 matches ?

so there are 72 mechs involved in 3 matches (24x3), and 1 of these will be killed by arty

OP WHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINE OP WHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINE OP WHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINE

well, either u are fast enough to escape (light, mediums) or u are armored enough to survive (heavys, assaults)

damaging/killing u with arty is as legal as damaging/killing u with anything else

and arty is pretty well balanced in the moment. not as useless as in the beginning, not as powerfull as some months ago.

-> thats BINGO, not OP

.

Edited by Masterrix, 11 November 2014 - 05:05 AM.