71 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

Night Thastus, on 13 September 2015 - 07:21 PM, said:

This is the first wave.
Of an experimental PTS server attempting to re-balance the game in it's entirety. You didn't expect they'd get it right on the first shot, right?

That's why many of us area playing matches, building 'Mechs, trying new tactics, and trying to give them detailed feedback so that they do get it right soon.

Instead of complaining that it isn't good, go and make a detailed post about what needs to change, and why. Then others will listen, or perhaps not. But at least there is a chance you will do something productive, rather than this.

This Completely
Russ in the Townhall, said that it wasnt ready, but he wanted the MWO community to see it,
to try it out, Russ wanted OUR feed back, this is the most open about Balance PGI has ever been,
so the question is can WE the MWO community handle this as Constructive Adults,

[Gas Guzzler]

Andi Nagasia, on 13 September 2015 - 07:46 PM, said:

This Completely
Russ in the Townhall, said that it wasnt ready, but he wanted the MWO community to see it,
to try it out, Russ wanted OUR feed back, this is the most open about Balance PGI has ever been,
so the question is can WE the MWO community handle this as Constructive Adults,

Some of us have, I posted general feed back in my own thread, and some other people came in and posted general constructive feedback as well. Unfortunately the rage threads get more publicity and activity so that is what shows up the most in this form.

[Vashramire]

Wayreth, on 13 September 2015 - 07:43 PM, said:

This is like the pot calling the kettle black. Causing drama while at the same time denouncing it? Radagast has a different experience with MWO and PGI as have I. Perhaps instead of denouncing people like him try to understand where he is coming from. I was there for the 2013 melt down when PGI was pushing forward without any word on what it was doing and the phrase “PGI Lied, MWO Died” was uttered quite often. People have been through a lot with this game and I mean A LOT. So please excuse us when we get gun shy over words like re balancing and new and improved.

You and me both are Founders. Been here since the beginning. I know what happened and stuff can look grim but that doesn't mean people have to put up with others that claim the game is dying based off of unreleased and very raw test server changes. Back then things were I'd say less in the hands of players for balance and feedback. These are different times. Not the best of times certainly but there is a difference between being shy about the changes and claiming the game is already destroyed. Those are two different things. If people are scared, say it. Don't threaten to stop giving them money which was the base topic of this thread and it's ridiculous that people even think that an appropriate way to get devs to listen to them. I don't threaten to quit my job when they say they are changing stuff at work. That would just be dumb.

[Livewyr]

Vashramire, on 13 September 2015 - 06:30 PM, said:

From what I gathered, the algorithm that chose quirks were basing the values off that mechs stock omnipod loadout and weapons. High or low profile weapon points and position equate to certain sensor and movement values. It goes nuts when you start swapping pods because you can min-max to have nearly all positive quirks on a bunch of mechs. They may need a separate algorithm for just clans that accounts for all possible hardpoints and locations for values.

They should just quirk the omnipod itself. It's always going to be in the same position on the mech, have the same armor/structure and hardpoints.. just quirk it according to it's needs.

[Mystere]

Andi Nagasia, on 13 September 2015 - 07:46 PM, said:

This Completely
Russ in the Townhall, said that it wasnt ready, but he wanted the MWO community to see it,
to try it out, Russ wanted OUR feed back, this is the most open about Balance PGI has ever been,
so the question is can WE the MWO community handle this as Constructive Adults,

Is that a rhetorical question?

[Vashramire]

Livewyr, on 13 September 2015 - 08:24 PM, said:

They should just quirk the omnipod itself. It's always going to be in the same position on the mech, have the same armor/structure and hardpoints.. just quirk it according to it's needs.

I don't know, it might work. I'm not a fan of how they handled omnipods in the first place. I'd say that needs a rework but I think everyone is tired of that word.

[ShinobiHunter]

Mystere, on 13 September 2015 - 04:57 PM, said:

You really do not need weapons balance when your intent is to test Mech durability. You just want to make sure that the target Mechs under analysis are being shot at and shot at often enough. Then analyze what did the shooting, how, and what effect it had on the target.

This PTS was a first run. It was a first test of their "diamond" balancing scheme, not actual balance itself.

I thought that was clear enough. Well, I guess not and PGI should say things more clearly.

Did PGI give an actual statement on this, or is this an guess? I didn't see anything regarding what exactly they were trying to discover with this PTS... I'm legitimately curious here, not trolling.

[MischiefSC]

"@russ_bullock Can you confirm weapon quirks in live won't be removed until weapon rebalance is done?"

"@MischiefSC yes of course - no guarantee even anything in the PTS will actually go live even- very early in testing"

Relax.

[Mystere]

ShinobiHunter, on 13 September 2015 - 08:47 PM, said:

Did PGI give an actual statement on this, or is this an guess? I didn't see anything regarding what exactly they were trying to discover with this PTS... I'm legitimately curious here, not trolling.

Russ and Paul both did say what they were putting out and that is was a first run. I deduced the rest. I mean, what else can you possibly test?

[ShinobiHunter]

Mystere, on 13 September 2015 - 09:04 PM, said:

Russ and Paul both did say what they were putting out and that is was a first run. I deduced the rest. I mean, what else can you possibly test?

Fair enough. It seems very nonsensical at first glance. I can't tell what they're actually trying to test, except that it's not weapon quirks. I'll have to go back and look through some of the quirks again. It would be nice if they told us what they were trying to test though. Testing mobility, durability and IW at the same time seems like it's asking for headaches, but it seems kinda random to be testing one aspect at a time.

[Throe]

the wr3ck, on 13 September 2015 - 01:48 PM, said:

It's been run into the ground all the balancing. Buy this then get crap in return. The simple solution is to stop buying stuff. I'm not going to argue this any more. I stopped supporting the game after timber nerfs. End the end your going to be left with few hundred die hard table top fans. I've been keeping an eye on the game and this is just putting a nail in the coffin.

You've been keeping an "eye" on this game? Have you played it lately?

[Koshirou]

ShinobiHunter, on 13 September 2015 - 03:40 PM, said:

I honestly planned to buy Marauders when the pre-order opened up... Now I think I may wait and see how this all pans out. I want to believe PGI won't ruin this game, but I'm not betting any money on it just yet.

+1

[Serpentbane]

Id rather have a game changing than sticking with something thats not working well just because I spent some money on it. And I've spent some money on this. The game should evolve, some changes might nerf your favourite mechs, so be it. You'll get to love new mechs in a while.

[Panthros]

There is a lesson here some are forgetting, "things change and with that, stop selling your stuff."

It is amazing to see many people crying that because something changed they should get their money back. As new mechs are introduced into the game, as new technology is introduced to the game, re-balancing is a must.

I appreciate PGI taking the time to make sure all mechs have value in a game. I have 242 mech bays full of mechs and I have been playing since the beginning. The change allows me to revisit mechs I have not played in months if not years which keeps the game fresh.

Now they do need single player, at least AI and new game modes along with keeping the maps fresh but that is a different story for another thread.

[Telmasa]

Mystere, on 13 September 2015 - 08:29 PM, said:

Is that a rhetorical question?

lol my thought exactly

[ShinobiHunter]

Panthros, on 14 September 2015 - 09:34 AM, said:

There is a lesson here some are forgetting, "things change and with that, stop selling your stuff."

It is amazing to see many people crying that because something changed they should get their money back. As new mechs are introduced into the game, as new technology is introduced to the game, re-balancing is a must.

I appreciate PGI taking the time to make sure all mechs have value in a game. I have 242 mech bays full of mechs and I have been playing since the beginning. The change allows me to revisit mechs I have not played in months if not years which keeps the game fresh.

Now they do need single player, at least AI and new game modes along with keeping the maps fresh but that is a different story for another thread.

Not sure about anyone else hear, but I don't want a refund. I've enjoyed this game thus far and I feel my money was well spent. However, I question the direction the game seems to be heading with this balance pass and will wait until it fleshes out before I spend any more money on it. If communication was better, I might be a bit more open-minded about this, but unless you harass Russ on Twitter, we can't seem to get a straight answer. It literally would have taken 10 minutes to post on the forums that this PTS was just to test sensors quirks...

[Andi Nagasia]

ShinobiHunter, on 14 September 2015 - 03:00 PM, said:

It literally would have taken 10 minutes to post on the forums that this PTS was just to test sensors quirks...

this was a very obvious over sight and misunderstanding,
but really look how some of us blew up with out having all the facts?

[bad arcade kitty]

if those mobility quirks go live i will simply quit
i don't want to play a game where assaults turn better than mediums

[Andi Nagasia]

bad arcade kitty, on 14 September 2015 - 03:35 PM, said:

if those mobility quirks go live i will simply quit
i don't want to play a game where assaults turn better than mediums

they wont, Paul is just ganna have to BEAT the Balance Matrix Ageratum till it behaves,
remember the CW ageratum when if first came out, Paul just needs to BEAT it,

[oldradagast]

Panthros, on 14 September 2015 - 09:34 AM, said:

There is a lesson here some are forgetting, "things change and with that, stop selling your stuff."

It is amazing to see many people crying that because something changed they should get their money back. As new mechs are introduced into the game, as new technology is introduced to the game, re-balancing is a must.

I appreciate PGI taking the time to make sure all mechs have value in a game. I have 242 mech bays full of mechs and I have been playing since the beginning. The change allows me to revisit mechs I have not played in months if not years which keeps the game fresh.

Now they do need single player, at least AI and new game modes along with keeping the maps fresh but that is a different story for another thread.

There is a vast difference between "things change" and "we've decided to rewrite the game into something vastly different than what you've been buying and playing so far because this shaky idea on the back of a napkin says so." Do you like the mechs you bought? Tough - we broke them. Buy some new ones instead! Right...

With all the people floating around here who seem offended that paying customers might not like having what they purchased being morphed into something else at somebody else's whim, it is no wonder that corporations have such an easy time selling crap to consumers and getting them to blow fortunes on upgrades and other junk.

But, hey - there's always another mech pack on sale, and maybe those mechs won't suck or have lame, non-combat "roles" - at least until you're done buying them...

Edited by oldradagast, 14 September 2015 - 06:12 PM.