20517 replies to this topic

[Sereglach]

FLG 01, on 10 April 2019 - 08:22 AM, said:

I actually did not doubt nostalgia plays a part, in fact I have been saying it time and again. I merely wanted hard numbers on how many people would like to buy the Hellhound; you did not provide one. I wanted sales figures; you did not provide them. I do not have such data, and you do not either.
You just go on endlessly on what I 'really' meant, how evil I am and so on. Everybody got that by now, and I am sure people are super exited to read it.

Well, you can try to double-back on your very clear statements all you want. You said that PGI should make their decisions on what will make a good or bad mech for the game, and what's "good" or "bad" is based solely on your perspectives and "skill". I apparently told you what you didn't like to hear and you got really upset about it, and offended, multiple times. Your skill with the game means nothing in deciding mechs PGI sells. You're demanding credence you do NOT deserve in any way. I'll trust PGI's marketing decisions over your BS any day of the week . . . after all, they're still in business and they haven't reached out to have you choose mechs for them.

The fact that you're trying to hide that behind demanding specific sales figures, that you know no one actually has except PGI themselves, just shows desperation in deflecting the arguments made . . . especially since it's not relevant to the points made. I showed you how PGI's marketing strategy supports what I stated about nostalgia selling mechs and needing community goodwill through nostalgic realeases to try to push forward obscure mechs. You refused to listen to that and instead deflected . . . again. Your point wasn't about nostalgia selling mechs. Your point was that PGI should focus their efforts on what will be "good" mechs over what will be "bad" mechs, based on your perspectives; and you were proven wrong again because you had to admit that PGI can make or break any mech they want with the wave of a hand.

If you want to keep it up, I can keep coming back as often as you want to reiterate the points you obviously don't want to acknowledge. I never said you're evil, I just said you're wrong, you refuse to admit it, you deflect, backpedal, and are full of BS proclaiming your "skill" with the game is what's important and demanding credence you don't deserve. Excited or not, I personally find this entertaining that you've kept coming back despite "walking away". Apparently the truth really touched some nerves.

[FLG 01]

Sereglach, on 10 April 2019 - 08:48 AM, said:

you had to admit that PGI can make or break any mech they want with the wave of a hand.

You say I had to "admit" it, as if I had not been saying it again and again... openly and directly... in this thread and many others ... for years. But hey, you really 'caught' me.

This is indicative of your style. The rest of your text is just more of the same misrepresentation, plus some outright frabrications, mixed with a good deal of amateurish psychology. I should have acted on my judgement of your posts not being worth a reply, that much is true though.

[Jay Leon Hart]

- Wolverine IIC Conjurer would be bad
- "Hellhound" would be bad

That said...

"Hellhound" should get the Nova/Black Hawk treatment but reversed - a Clan original Hellhound OmniMech, named after the IS term for the Wolverine IIC Conjurer, that is just the MW4 version.

[Virlutris]

Sereglach, on 09 April 2019 - 03:07 PM, said:

As far as the name, again, PGI uses all of the proper Clan names. Hellhound is the proper clan name of the MW4 mech. Conjurer is the proper clan name of the TT mech. They even go so far as to make that lore distinction of the different mechs; and lore precedent already exists for it for both MW4 and TT. All the legwork is already done. It's like the Mad Cat Mk II being called the "Mad Cat Mk II" instead of the "Timber Wolf Mk II" . . . the Clans actually made a second generation mech and used the IS nickname of the first generation mech when naming the second one. To me, there's no reason -lore or otherwise- to actually change the name. The Hellhound is a second generation Clan Omnimech within IS bounds using captured and retooled factory assets to support clan technology, then named after the IS nickname for an outdated and obsolete older clan mech.

I think Hellhound Mk II would work nicely. It makes them linked and distinct in one fell swoop. Whip up some lore from the Diamond Shark sales team ... err, merchant caste ... looking to capitalize on things (edit: and flopping to some degree or another, for reasons) by co-opting the IS nickname for it, and viola!

Whether they should introduce it alongside the other ClanTek 50-tonners is a different debate. This is how I'd play it if they did.

Gas Guzzler, on 10 April 2019 - 08:31 AM, said:

Is the anticipation killing anyone else? Should get a mech pack announcement AND beginning of MAD II countdown

My curiosity's always easy to prompt. I'm wondering if it's more interesting if they continue their recent pattern or if they break it.

Pretty good odds for a ClanTek light, going by the last 9 releases from that tech base, but I'm braced for the unexpected. Like an IS heavy or ClanTek assault.

Edited by Virlutris, 10 April 2019 - 11:47 AM.

[Sereglach]

FLG 01, on 10 April 2019 - 09:04 AM, said:

You say I had to "admit" it, as if I had not been saying it again and again... openly and directly... in this thread and many others ... for years. But hey, you really 'caught' me.

This is indicative of your style. The rest of your text is just more of the same misrepresentation, plus some outright frabrications, mixed with a good deal of amateurish psychology. I should have acted on my judgement of your posts not being worth a reply, that much is true though.

I wouldn't call back-peddling over demands that you get credit you don't deserve and refusing to acknowledge PGI's proper marketing strategy a simple "catch". You've been dodging arguments and making straw-man claims for the sake of bolstering your own position over and over, refusing to acknowledge everything that's proven you wrong and then claim it's stuff you've already been saying. Consider it what you want, you think you're far more important than you are and have taken a false "high horse" stance this whole debate.

The fact you'll turn around and call the truth is somehow a misrepresentation is the EXACT reason Russ -admittedly- is right that 1. PGI listens and has listened to the community too damn much and 2. "Good" players don't know the first thing about actually running the game and making a company stay afloat . . . they know what's good for their gameplay meta, not what's healthy for the game. You've proven that on your personal tastes in mech implemenation and claim it's the "right" way for PGI to choose mechs.

All in all, I'm glad people like you aren't making the marketing decisions at PGI. They make mechs as they see fit; and hopefully they'll stop listening to an elitist, spoiled, self-entitled community enough (which you've done a prime job of representing through your demands of credence you don't deserve) to get the game balanced and in order, like they've actually been doing this past 6 months. Otherwise MWO would go the way of TT Battletech and allow the IP to die a slow miserable suicidal death of grognard destructrion.

Anyway, thanks for the entertainment and I hope we can do this again, real soon.

[FLG 01]

You made all those points before, so ... yawn. I prefer playing this game while you may 'entertain' yourself and waste your time writing the next rant.

Edited by FLG 01, 10 April 2019 - 02:35 PM.

[Sereglach]

FLG 01, on 10 April 2019 - 02:34 PM, said:

You made all those points before, so ... yawn. I prefer playing this game while you may 'entertain' yourself and waste your time writing the next rant.

Last word? Ooooo. You're right, I keep making the points while you keep flailing for straw-mans to claim excuses, back-pedal, and double-speak yourself into a corner. It is entertaining. In the mean time, keep playing the game. Nothing is stopping you.

I'll be waiting for MW5, and for PGI to finish kicking the pointless opinions of self-important meta-jocks like you to the curb so they can finally deal with the core issues of the game, like LRMs finally getting attention and people getting their nostalgia driven mechs.

Edited by Sereglach, 10 April 2019 - 03:04 PM.

[CycKath]

See what you did PGI! Lack of 'Mech announcement and we turn on ourselves!

[Odanan]

CycKath, on 10 April 2019 - 03:02 PM, said:

See what you did PGI! Lack of 'Mech announcement and we turn on ourselves!

That's not the Community Warfare we were looking for!

[FLG 01]

Odanan, on 10 April 2019 - 03:08 PM, said:

That's not the Community Warfare we were looking for!

Ok, I have to admit that is a funny line.

[TheArisen]

Using the Nightstar to discredit someone's opinion of why a mech would be good is pretty much missing what happened. Hopefully this can be taken in a non-antagonistic way but I am a little salty about it.

PGI mutilated the Nightstar and literally took away all of the things that would if made it good. The Nightstar is the literal reason I (and a few others) started saying "potentially strong" or some such. My actual feeling on the NSR are it was almost like a practical joke because I was super pumped to see it and then as I started objectively looking at PGI's rendition... I didn't want to seem ungrateful they took notice but it was almost nothing like what was envisioned... By anyone. So basically, PGI can make a mech good or they can castrate it.

The lessons learned are basically look for mechs that need as little help from PGI as is possible that are difficult to mess up or interpret in a weird way. PGI isn't going to give the Hollander 8 ballistic hps and indeed that would make the Hollander not the Hollander. Basically this is why, imo, the Hollander is not a good pick. The 45 ton Hollander II would still be bad but not as bad.

I like lists so this is what I try to look for.
- Good geometry, this one is hard because ultimately PGI will do what they will but sticking to mechs that *should* have good geo is important
- Hard point types & locations, self explanatory but it is important to remember what is a reasonable amount of inflation
- Fills a weight class or gameplay (JJ 25 tonner like the Brigand for example)
- I also try to work within the confines of nostalgia but that can be pretty limiting but the ideal is a popular mech with good qualities. I'd bet this is roughly what PGI tries to do but considering how rare the Hellspawn or Thanatos is I don't think it's fair to say PGI is always right. (Sereg I know you made this point but I wasn't aiming this at you)

In short though the best are the mechs that don't need quirks, crazy inflation or other exceptions like engine cap. But at the end of the day you can only analyze so much.

Indeed as someone that has nostalgia for the MW4 Conjurer I would be concerned about it's frankly gigantic torsos. Still being fragile doesn't make a mech bad (Hunchback IIc anyone?) but it's kind of a JJ-less Shadow cat with a notably bigger torso and since it's Clan getting quirks to compensate is less likely. Fup's idea is clearly the best way to make both sides happy. I could see it being kind of like a faster but no jj Huntsman.

[50 50]

And somewhere in the world there is an explosion located where Juodos happens to be as we learn the next mech is late to be announced because it is a quad....

Karl Streiger, on 07 March 2019 - 12:46 AM, said:

Only if PGI include vomit bags in the preorder.
Can you imagine the tiny step animation cause wobbling - multipled with factor 4, plus the refelction and look on the PPC barrel that moves complete different to the cockpit shake?

... and the cockpit standing item is barf bags......

[Sereglach]

TheArisen, on 11 April 2019 - 12:19 AM, said:

*snip*

Seeing where this is addressed, it takes a mere few statements to nullify, salty or not.

1. It's admitted that PGI can make or break mechs on a whim. Therefore, perceived performance in game is zero reason to determine whether PGI should or shouldn't make a mech. That's probably the biggest and most important point. If a mech turns out poorly, it's PGI's job to address the mech and balance it. It could have been done long ago, but the community can't seem to stay focused on their tantrum-filled screaming demands at PGI, so PGI moved on to the next demand.

2. The Nightstar DOES discredit opinion because it adamantly proves the point, all on its own, the personal preference to implement a mech and the salt that occurs when it's not done "right" aka. the mech turns out poorly. Ironically, the Nightstar blew a bunch of PGI goodwill capital because not only was it an obscure mech, but they didn't do it right . . . even though the self-proclaimed experts said it'd be a great mech, which in turn makes the community all the more leery of seeing more obscure mechs in the future. Thus discussions and requests about the Argus, MW4 Hellhound, and remaining MW2 (Clan, GB, and Mercs) mechs instead of obscure mechs that'd be "good".

3. Again, if PGI makes nostalgic mechs and balances them well, to do them "right", it earns more community goodwill that PGI can then use to implement obscure or "dark horse" mechs. Want more obscure mechs because you think they'll be good? Then push PGI to do better balancing on the mechs released. Otherwise, people just want their hangar queen mech art of the nostalgic mechs they've loved in the past.

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

As for the Hollander, since it's brought up, I see that as a special case. Most people remember the Hollander and have HUGE amounts of nostalgia from the mech in MechCommander. The problem is that most people never noticed and/or remember the "II" at the end of the mech and it was only ever commonly referred to as the Hollander . . . just like I intentionally did at the beginning of this paragraph. That's the biggest problem with that mech . . . the nostalgia is misplaced and they don't realize the mech they're fawning over is actually the Hollander II. I think if PGI implemented the Hollander II it'd probably need some notable quirks, but it'd probably be well received.

Edited by Sereglach, 11 April 2019 - 01:42 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

At this point I'll settle for anything, let's just get on with it.

[Marauder3D]

The true home run would be for PGI to finally give us the Fire Moth. I think sales would be high for all the Clan fan bois and the grognards. Ugly arms be damned. However, if they don't arm quirk the bejesus out of that thing, it will be well nigh useless, because hitting those funky arms is going to be pretty easy.

[Odanan]

Marauder3D, on 11 April 2019 - 01:55 PM, said:

The true home run would be for PGI to finally give us the Fire Moth.

This. ^

[Bishop Steiner]

Karl Streiger, on 10 April 2019 - 06:39 AM, said:

wasn't the Vulcan your 'fault'? clearly one of the later more decent looking Mechs

doubtful. But you never know. I did champion the Assassin and Vulcan both prety hard (and for a time, the Dervish). Gave up on the Derv once the Kintaro was announced. Only one I am demonstrably guilty of is the Urbanmech, in general and K9 in particular.

TheArisen, on 11 April 2019 - 12:19 AM, said:

Using the Nightstar to discredit someone's opinion of why a mech would be good is pretty much missing what happened. Hopefully this can be taken in a non-antagonistic way but I am a little salty about it.

PGI mutilated the Nightstar and literally took away all of the things that would if made it good. The Nightstar is the literal reason I (and a few others) started saying "potentially strong" or some such. My actual feeling on the NSR are it was almost like a practical joke because I was super pumped to see it and then as I started objectively looking at PGI's rendition... I didn't want to seem ungrateful they took notice but it was almost nothing like what was envisioned... By anyone. So basically, PGI can make a mech good or they can castrate it.

The lessons learned are basically look for mechs that need as little help from PGI as is possible that are difficult to mess up or interpret in a weird way. PGI isn't going to give the Hollander 8 ballistic hps and indeed that would make the Hollander not the Hollander. Basically this is why, imo, the Hollander is not a good pick. The 45 ton Hollander II would still be bad but not as bad.

I like lists so this is what I try to look for.
- Good geometry, this one is hard because ultimately PGI will do what they will but sticking to mechs that *should* have good geo is important
- Hard point types & locations, self explanatory but it is important to remember what is a reasonable amount of inflation
- Fills a weight class or gameplay (JJ 25 tonner like the Brigand for example)
- I also try to work within the confines of nostalgia but that can be pretty limiting but the ideal is a popular mech with good qualities. I'd bet this is roughly what PGI tries to do but considering how rare the Hellspawn or Thanatos is I don't think it's fair to say PGI is always right. (Sereg I know you made this point but I wasn't aiming this at you)

In short though the best are the mechs that don't need quirks, crazy inflation or other exceptions like engine cap. But at the end of the day you can only analyze so much.

Indeed as someone that has nostalgia for the MW4 Conjurer I would be concerned about it's frankly gigantic torsos. Still being fragile doesn't make a mech bad (Hunchback IIc anyone?) but it's kind of a JJ-less Shadow cat with a notably bigger torso and since it's Clan getting quirks to compensate is less likely. Fup's idea is clearly the best way to make both sides happy. I could see it being kind of like a faster but no jj Huntsman.

I felt real bad when the Nightstar was announce. Art and model, it's one of PGIs most lackluster jobs, IMO. So oddly proportioned, too.

FLG 01, on 10 April 2019 - 08:22 AM, said:

I actually did not doubt nostalgia plays a part, in fact I have been saying it time and again. I merely wanted hard numbers on how many people would like to buy the Hellhound; you did not provide one. I wanted sales figures; you did not provide them. I do not have such data, and you do not either.
You just go on endlessly on what I 'really' meant, how evil I am and so on. Everybody got that by now, and I am sure people are super exited to read it.

Isn't it usually on Friday? So hard to remember, I'm here so infrequently these days. Just waiting for tthe Dervish to see if it adds some chuckles for a bit.

[Sereglach]

Looks like they might not do a mech while they're trying to push the MW5 preorder bonuses. Reasonable marketing strategy, since people won't likely spend on both the preorder AND a new mech pack at the same time. After all, they extended the Warhammer IIC a month due to similar circumstances, and the preorder bonuses run to exactly the end of the month.

I'd like to be proven wrong, though, and still see a mech announcement for the month. However, by the time this weekend is over we'll be at the halfway mark of April. It just doesn't seem likely after that. No word on the lack of announcement, either, unlike the last delay.

[Odanan]

Sereglach, on 12 April 2019 - 04:55 PM, said:

Looks like they might not do a mech while they're trying to push the MW5 preorder bonuses. Reasonable marketing strategy, since people won't likely spend on both the preorder AND a new mech pack at the same time. After all, they extended the Warhammer IIC a month due to similar circumstances, and the preorder bonuses run to exactly the end of the month.

I'd like to be proven wrong, though, and still see a mech announcement for the month. However, by the time this weekend is over we'll be at the halfway mark of April. It just doesn't seem likely after that. No word on the lack of announcement, either, unlike the last delay.

[Sereglach]

Odanan, on 12 April 2019 - 04:59 PM, said:

I know. I feel the same way.