0
Why i wrote this wall of text
Sorry for the late feedback but it took some time to think these things through and write them down. This not being my native language didn't made this faster also.
This was a lot of work so i hope you developers will read this. I wrote that much because i think it is necessary.
I hate to write in forums so i'm one of the silent majority of players.
You can believe me that i normally would never ever have written this.
But i'm in a dire fear because of the post from Paul (http://mwomercs.com/...alance-and-pts/) and my impressions from the PTS.
I have invested a lot of time and money to this game and i love MWO despite its weaknesses.
My first reaction to Pauls post was: I stared at my monitor for a long time, not believing what i just read.
Then there folowed a lot of /(%/&T%)/&. Seeing the quirks at the PTS and hopping with some mechs into training ground there was some more $&/§/§!!%%$/.
But maybe i'm only short on information you don't shared with us or i missunderstood sth. and all is good.
But i want to make sure that you understand my issues.
So i tried to calm down and started to write this to prevent possible damage to the game and maybe give some insights from my perspective that may help you.
contents
Role Warfare
- What roles do we have in MWO?
- Subroles in MWO
- Possible aditional subroles
- Scout
- Artillerie
- Conclusion for Role Warefare
- Sensors in MWO
- Sensors in Lore
- Conclusion for Infowarefare
- What wins you the game?
- What are the factors to kill the enemy mechs faster?
- Heat Capacity
- Dual Gauss
- Balancing Heat intensive Weapons
- Balancing low-/no-Heat Weapons
- PPC, ERPPC, Clan ERPPC and Jumpsniping
- Gauss + Lasers vs. Gauss + PPCs
- Implementation of the Balance Solutions
- Time to Kill/Game Dynamics
- Mech Balancing
- IS vs. Clan
- Origins IIC
- Quirks
- PTS Quirks
- What quirks matter to win?
- Engine-Rating Scaling with Mobility
- PTS and Testing
- Logic Issues
- Maps
- A Vision for CW
- What would the maps need?
Over and Out
Role Warfare
What roles do we have in MWO?
1. Damagedealer
2. Damagedealer
3. Damagedealer
4. Damagedealer
5. I think you got my point
We don't have other roles, because nothing else is realy rewarded and more important wins you the match.
A mech that can't do proper damage and because of that is dedicated to a different role needs at least to equalize for a real damagedealer to consider it worth to be taken to the battlefield.
Also the role needs to be rewarded equaly in C-Bills and XP.
The damagdealer only role is reflected by every aspekt of the game like the maps, the mechs been mainly played or the targeting/sensor mechanic etc.
Playing a mech that can not participate because of its limited possibilities to do damage is not fun.
I started the game buying a Spider learnig this the hard way. My next mech was the Jenner and it was so much more fun, because it could actually do good damage and helped the team to win way easier.
Ok i admid i had fun in my Spider, but it was not very effective and it didn't influenced the outcome of the match most of the times by much.
At least it was durable like a whole Steiner scout lance back in the days
because of broken hitboxes (Steiner scout lance = four Atlases for those who don't know the lore).Subroles in MWO
We have sub roles for the damagedealer in MWO:
- close range - Brawler
- mid range
- long range - Sniper
Also we have weightclasses of subroles:
- Light brawler (Firestarter, Arctic Cheetah)
- Medium brawler (Griffin 3M/2N)
- Heavy brawler (Thunderbolt 5SS)
- Assault brawler (Atlas DDC/S)
The fast lights have aditional to their role as damagedealers a role as scout.
Also we have weapons bound to a role by their range.
Possible aditional subroles
Scout
In the books scouts were a bit bevore the main force, sure. After spoting the enemy they retreated to the main force.
And then they joined the fight = need to do damage.
From a logil approach scouting is always best done not by mechs. Infantry scouts and light vehicles are far supperior.
Why? They are cheap and you could afford to loose them more than your mechs. They are less obvious also.
Thats why the Battlegroups from Davion or Comguards were so effective. Combined forces each used to their individual strenghts.
Besides the Davion Light Guards regiment was not for scouting only
A lot of the light mechs like the Locust are not even meant to fight other mechs.
They were designed to fight infantry on guard missions or patrol.
To properly implement a scout role it needs a completly different approach.
Especially the sensor/targeting mechanics and map complexity are key to this role, i come back to this later.
Artillerie
For Artillerie we have the Long Tom and the Arrow IV system. The Long Tom can not be mounted to a mech, because it needs 30 critical slots.
The Arrow IV uses 12 critical slots for clans and 15 for IS. With the current implementation of critical slots only the Origin IIC mechs can mount this.
By lore there was for example the Catapult C3 with an Arrow IV and 1 ton of amunition (5 shots).
The range of the Arrow IV is measured in maps (clan = 9, IS = 8).
If a scout tags an enemy the artillery mech could fire from petty much everywhere on a MWO map and hit the enemy with 10 damage for IS and 20 for clans.
Assuming an implementation close to the lore it won't be effective for MWO. We allready have artillerie with the artillerie/airstrike consumable.
Besides i don't think it is fun to shoot mechs that way, but i also don't like to play LRMs, so it's a personal preference.
Conclusion for Role Warefare
Abandon role warefare, at least for now. The game is at the moment not in a state to support roles properly.
If this changes later you can still consider to implement role warefare.
To change the game to a state so that you can actually implement real roles would be an extrem effort.
I don't think you have the recources in manpower and time to do right now.
Other things are more needed (preparing the game for steam release, balancing, maps, CW,...).
Another thing to consider is matchmaking. The matchmaker has to make sure that the teams get the right amount of each role.
You probably will not win a match with a team of dedicated scouts only.
Sensors, Targeting and Infowarfare
Sensors in MWO
Sensor locks are important in 3 aspects.
They are needed to hit with LRMs and SSRMs.
They show where the enemy is. This is especially important to solo-pug-matches because larger groups and 12mans use their eyes and comunicate with Teamspeak.
They give you infos about the loadout and the damagestate of the locked mech.
The sensors have nothing to do what the pilot can see.
Nightvision and heatvision are not bound to sensors they are bound to the view from the cockpit window.
Sensors in Lore
In lore a mechwarrior sees from his mechs sensors a 360° all-around view of the area around him compressed to 180° at his Monitor.
The crosshair is a projection to his eye/neurohelmet (Note sure of this. I'm to lazy to consult the books right now).
To shoot an enemy mech he draws his crosshair on his monitor over the enemy trying to hold it as steady as possible until the crosshair is flashing golden.
The golden fleshing means that his weapons are aligned to the target based on the sensor readout.
This still doesn't means that the weapons will hit the target.
He can still screw his aim by stumbling over or the target does an unexpected maneuver etc.
The Pilot can look through his window but his targeting computer (not the additional equipped TC) will not lock on to a target without sensor lock.
If his sensors are screwed he has to shoot manually.
This means he has to draw his crosshair over the target not knowing if his weapons are aligned to the target or not.
So shooting without sensors is very difficult like shooting from the hip = high miss chance.
Conclusion for Infowarefare
These major differences between lore and MWO limit what is possible to do from an infowarefare aspect.
To alter some values of the MWO targeting/sensor mechanic can only influence the aspects stated above.
All other weapons than LRMs and SSRMs are not limited by sensor lock. You can still see and shoot the target.
To change the range of influence the complete targeting/sensor mechanic needs to be reengineered.
To achieve this the crosshair must be influenced by what the sensors can see and not by cockpit view.
I don't think it's an option to alter the MWO targeting/sensor mechanic to the lore because i think the resources to do this are better used on other stuff.
Also the gameplay would change so dramaticly that i don't know the impact to the playerbase this being pleasing to play for them/me or not.
A possibillity would be to bind the visionmodes nightvision and heatvision to the sensor range.
This could influence maps during nighttime or with a bad overall visibility massivly.
Mechs with a low sensor range would be more limited in their view range from their cockpit.
To work properly it must not be possible to see enemys in the distance with normal view.
Adjusting gama/color/brightness/whatever values to see them in normal view mustn't work.
But this may result in VisionmodeWarriorOnline and i like maps where you can actually see things.
About winning
What wins you the game?
Killing the enemy mechs faster than they can kill your team.
I exclude capping and destroying the generator of the orbital canon in CW, because thats a different topic.
What are the factors to kill the enemy mechs faster?
In order of Importance:
- Better teamplay (including usage of terain, tactics, speed, deathballing, focusfire and strategie - in bigger groups/12 mans, etc.)
- more damage done
- better defenses (armor/internals, speed, reactor(std/xl - is/clan), asymetric/symetric builds (shielding/damage spreading), usage of terain)
- Hitting "R" and UAVs for knowing where the enemy is in pug matches (groups and competitive teams use their eyes, UAVs and Teamspeak)
- Target lock for LRMs and SSRMs (no other weapon needs a target lock)
You can't balance teamplay
So damage is the most important factor for balancing the game. Especially in the long run because of the Origins IIC mechs.
Heat, Cooldowns, Gauss and Balance Solutions
Heat Capacity
My solution would be to get rid of the heat capacity for additional added heatsinks and combine this with an increased cooldown for low-/no-heat Weapons.
The combination of these both is needed to get a balance mechanic equalizing heat intensive weapons with low-/no-heat weapons.
From TableTop you would have 30 points of heatcapacity to use before the mech is shutting down.
If you use the 30 heatcap you can get rid of ghost heat.
To work properly you have to adjust overheat damage to prevent sth. ridiculous like the 11 ER-PPC Direwolf.
It needs to die instantly by firing an alphastrike to equalize the one shot potential. Overheat damage needs to scale exponential.
A Jenner-F can still do its 6 medium laser 30 point damage alphastrike.
But this would bring down the firepower of bigger Mechs a lot.
My Direwolf has right now an alpha of 84 points of damage (2Gauss, 2LPL, 4ERML).
After these changes a Direwolf could fire something like the below stated without overheating:
2 Gauss + 4 medium puls laser = 62 damage
2 Gauss + 2 large puls lasers = 56 damage
Still a lot, but imagine you increased the cooldown of the Gauss to 6 or 8 seconds for being a powerfull low-heat/high-damage weapon.
Dual Gauss
A solution to the dual-Gauss-problem would be to allow only 1 Gauss to charge at a time.
This is allready implemented with the difference of 2 Gauss able to charge.
Because this is mainly a problem with the Direwolf, Kingcrab and to a much lesser extent with the Mauler there might be possible exceptions.
Mechs that can fit dual Gauss without the possibillity of mounting additional weapons effectivly could be allowed to charge dual Gauss by quirks.
I hear a lot of Jager and K2 pilots breath out loud and see a diminishing of the red color at their heads
There would still be a downside to their dual Gauss charge usage.
With the longer cooldown applied to the Gauss they are vulnerable to close range combat where weapons should have shorter cooldown times outdamaging them.
This mechanic has to be explained in the tutorials for new players.
It would also fit to the lore because of the high energy consumption of the Gauss.
But please don't impement energie as an additional resource overcomplicating things.
Balancing Heat intensive Weapons
To balance these i propose two options for tweaking.
To increase/decrease the overall performance of these weapons adjust the heat dissipation of the engine mounted heat sinks.
If you want to increase/decrease the performance of lighter mechs in relation to heavier mechs adjust the heat dissipation of the additional mounted heat sinks.
Because lighter mechs depend more on weightsavings like endosteel and ferrofibrous they have a very limited amount of critical slots and tonage left for heatsinks.
This results in a lesser amount of additional heatsinks limiting their heat dissipation more in relation to heavier mechs.
This doesn't hurt clan lights with smaller engines though. But slow lights are no powerhouse anyway.
Anyway the difference in critical slots of heatsinks/endo/ferro between clans and IS is a heavy downside for IS.
Balancing low-/no-Heat Weapons
To balance these i propose two options for tweaking.
To increase/decrease the overall performance of these weapons adjust their cooldown times.
If you want to increase/decrease the performance of lighter mechs in relation to heavier mechs adjust amunition per ton.
Because lighter mechs have a lesser amount of tonnage available the influence of a ton of more/less amunition needed to have enough of it impacts them more than heavier mechs
PPC, ERPPC, Clan ERPPC and Jumpsniping
Get rid of the splashdamage from clan ERPPCs and let them do 15 damage pinpoint.
With the maximum heat cappacity of 30 points bevore shutting down there can only fired 2 ERPPCs/3 PPCs.
If the 1 heat point of a Gauss is added there is the downside of a shutdown.
To prevent abuse by jumpsniping with the intend of a shutdown behind cover alter the shutdown mechanic.
A mech should not dissipate heat or reduce cooldown of weapons if it is shutdown.
It has no power to recharge the weapons or operate the heatsinks.
This dosn't prevent the abuse but it gives a hefty downside in time not being abled to shoot.
Gauss + Lasers vs. Gauss + PPCs
With the changes stated above they should be pretty much equal at mid- to long-range damage wise.
The laser-combo has the downside of spreading damage more.
the PPC-combo has the downside being harder to aim because of the traveltime.
Jumpsniping might favour the PPC-combo but i think that can be equalized by adjusting laser burn times or damage values.
If Gauss is combined with medium or smaller sized lasers they will outdamage the Gauss + PPC combo at closer ranges.
This is good because the PPC is no close-range weapon anyway.
Implementation of the Balance Solutions
The solutions i stated above depend on each other so they must be implemented all together.
An adequate test time at the PTS is needed to tweak out the values to make these solutions viable.
After going live there are needed iterativ adjustments to improve the balance further.
Time to Kill/Game Dynamics
The time to kill should allready went down significant by my solutions.
For further adjustments there can be used two approaches:
Adjust the values as stated in the topics "Balancing Heat intensive Weapons" and "Balancing low-/no-Heat Weapons".
Adjust durabillity on all mechs but equalize these changes by adjusting amunition per ton as well.
Otherwise amunition dependent weapons would lose/gain an advantage compared to non-amunition weapons.
Mech Balancing
No negative Quirks please because negative quirks are discouraging!
The loadouts of the best performing mechs are your baseline for weapon balancing.
If weapons on these mechs are overpowered downgrade the weapons not the mech. Buff the underperforming mechs up to par by quirks/hardpoints.
All weapons should be in a state that they are decently usable but not overpowered.
Quirk mechs or variants lacking damage wise with qirks boosting the damage aka. heat reduction, range, cooldown etc.
Quirk mechs with armor/structure for major weaknesses in hitboxes, vulnerable weapon mount locations or these that should use a specific playstile like the Centurion with his shielding arm.
More fragile mechs or some with other weaknesses could be quirked to be high risk high reward damage wise.
If a mech can't still keep up because of lacking in hardpoints add hardpoints.
IS vs. Clan
If you stay inside lore you can't fix balance between them, period. The Clans were ment to be ridiculous overpowered.
A slight balancing factor from the lore "zellbrigen" is not an option (zellbrigen = ruleset a clan warrior has to follow for his honor).
We can't hide our mechs in earth holes with camouflage nets either to trick claners.
12 IS vs. 10 clan is not an option too i think.
This would work for the current CW but not for the planed scout missions.
On pug-matches this won't do either because of the mix of IS and clans.
So you have to balance them down to IS level especially their range is way to powerfull.
I know i'm a heretic, burn me, but a game needs balance and if it's the only way... And so shall it be, seyla.
By the way i love the lore too and read all the books and played tabletop back in the days.
Nevertheless a clan mech with IS strenght weapons would still be way more powerfull than an IS mech.
This is the case because of better double heatsinks, clan XL reactor and less slots consumed by endosteel and ferrofibrous.
Additionally clan ferrofibrous has a slightly better amount of armor points per ton.
The clan stuff will still consume less tons and critical slots too.
But what is with the underperforming clan mechs? Quirk them like the IS until they are balanced.
I hope you find a way to do this still maintaining a different flavour for the clans.
Origins IIC
If you balanced the weapons/game-mechanics properly...not a big problem. If not:
The Highlander and to a minor degree the Orion are limited by their hardpoints and won't be a big problem.
But the Jenner and Hunchback are not limited by anything.
They literally have no downside. They have all strenghts of the IS being as customizable without the weakness of locked equip.
If you tried to balance without downsizing clan weapons to IS level all your balancing tries will be down the toilet.
Quirks
The quirks have been a good addition to MWO. This brought a big variation of mechs to the battlefield which were considered unique unicorns.
It also added a unique flavour to some mechs/variants practically forcing them to a specific style of gameplay to be most effective.
But still a lot of mechs got the short end of the stick rusting in the hangar.
PTS Quirks
The quirks i saw on the PTS looked like they were applied by dicerole often making no sense at all.
I assume this was only to test how they would perform to get metrics.
Even so i will tell you my impressions.
The amount of quirks was ridiculus and confusing, overcomplicating things.
The mobility quirks were irritating, because mechs felt like being in a different weight class.
I found it strange that the quirks varied between variants of a mech that much.
Weapon quirks have to match the hardpoints but the others should not differ that much between variants because it's still the same mech.
What quirks matter to win?
Every qirks that influenced the possibility of doing damage and in some cases additionally tweaked a mayor weakness of a mech/variant.
For example the Hunchback. It has good Weapon quirks and buffs to its hunch. Without the weapon quirks it would be a bad mech.
Without the hunch tweaks it would be only a bit bad but still not decent. The combination of Quirks made it playable.
Because of the different hardpoints between the variants and good quirks it has become a decent mech with a lot of variabilities what you can play with the Hunchbacks.
This brought a very unique flavour to each variant.
It restricts the variants to specific weapon systems to be most effective.
Although you can still mount other weapons with the downside of being not that effective anymore.
All other quirks can only add up to the damage quirks, because a lack in firepower can not be equalized in the current state of the game.
Engine-Rating Scaling with Mobility
To prevent ridiculous mobility on mechs with an oversized engine reduce the scaling values or bind mobility to tonnage without scaling.
If you think a specific mech should have better mobility quirk it mobility wise, but remember no negative Quirks please!
PTS and Testing
Please don't expect PTS-tests to work while there is an event at the live-server.
Encourage people to help you test by giving them rewards.
I tink a lot of people think why should i do the work to myself downloading the test-client and play without even getting some C-Bills and XP.
Let their C-Bill- and XP-earnings transfer to their live-account or do an event that rewards them with sth.
My Problem with Comunity Warfare
Logic Issues
I like the Idea of CW, realy. I'm a die hard Kurita loyalist, i want to fight for the Dragon. But i don't like the way the game mode is designed at all.
To take a fortified base you need a massiv amount more resources (twice at least) or far advanced technologie than the defender, because the defender is fortified and prepared for the arrival of enemies.
The game mode isn't reflecting this by any means. The bases are not realy sth. you can called fortified. And the attacker is equal to the defender in weight and numbers.
A solution to this would be my vision stated below.
Maps
The maps are by their design limited to a few aproaches. I'm a medium mech player, i want to flank, skirmish, maneuver, have possibilities.
But the aproach paths limit me in doing so. I can't surprise the enemy, he knows allready where i'll come from.
There are two kinds of tactics in this game mode: rush or to wear of the enemy by trading better, often through sniping. I hate snipe festivals.
As long as CW is what it is i will never participate, not even if you have an event with cool rewards.
And thats my thing with this game mode. It is so limiting in what can be done in tactics, playstile, usage of terrain, etc.
I hope the scout missions will be more pleasing.
A Vision for CW
I like MWO to be a thinking mans shooter but for the needed depth you have to provide options so that this is the case.
I don't think that MWO will attract the type of player that likes it simple, fast and ordinary anyway.
Imagine a scenario with 3 main targets. 2 of them have to be destroyed to achieve a win condition giving more compexity in possibilities.
For example we take a small/medium sized town. Targets could be the local barracks, the sensor arrays at the spaceport and the power plant of the town.
Targets for other maps could be the palace of the government, a military airbase, a mech factory, a spare parts depot, etc.
All of the targets are fortified so that even a single lance can hold the ground against a full company for some time.
The Lances protecting the other targets will have to reinforce the attacked Lance or it will be overwhelmed.
The targets must be approachable from a lot of directions but hard to attack.
If defense turrets are in place at the targets they should warn the defending forces nearby.
This could be achieved by acoustic sirens or target locks but only to defending forces very close to the area.
Only if the target has defenders there sould be a warning. They should have to use voice-/text-chat to inform the other defenders furter away.
I personally like the sirens more.
The length of the paths for reinforcing the defenders should be adjusted to make it possible to reach the attacked target just in time.
But there should also be the possibility to sneaky cut off the reinforcements.
This scenario would open up a whole lot of strategical possibilities to the attacker and the defender.
The defenders could protect only 2 targets giving the enemy a free one but making it harder for the enemy to achieve the second goal.
But this would also increase the defenders risk by loosing only one more target for the match being lost.
The defender could position a small troop at the targets and have reinforcements waiting stratecigly positioned between the targets to get faster to where it's needed.
The downside Would be that the reinforcement unit could be overwhelmed by a superior amount of enemys by not being in a good protected area.
Also they can be cut of by a small force distracting them for some time.
The defender could retreat to the other 2 targets seeing a heavy rush they couldn't hold despite the superior defenses of the target.
The Attacker has to scout from multiple high positions and angles from far away to get informations how the defenders are positioned.
An ECM-cloaked mech could sneak up to closer range for scouting using vision hindering cover like trees or sneak up through a small valley poking for intel with caution.
Or the Attackers rushes with all their force without scouting, high risk high reward.
The attackers have to adapt and find a good strategie and tactics to make use of the situation.
This would actually implement a complex scenario where the role of a scout is so important that it would equalize some lack in firepower.
I personally would get rid of the respawn system. It is to unrealistic for my taste.
To just hop into the next mech is the approach of an ordinary shooter and shouldn't be valid for a game with this huge background.
Leave each pilot with 4 mechs 1 of each weight class.
When both teams are ready to launch each team has some time to assign a leader by vote and get info if they are attacking or defending.
If a team can't find a leader by themself the player with the highest ELO-rating will be assigned automatically.
They will also get the information on which map they fight and where each lance of their team lands.
Because of these informations the leader will assign 1 out of the 4 mechs each player has, that is taken to the battlefield.
He can also swap players between lances.
There will be a maximum in tonage or sth. like 3/3/3/3 what can be selected.
If the leader doesn't select something the mechs will be assigned automatically to fit the tonnage or 3/3/3/3 system.
The launch process will nudge the players a bit to comunicate also. Helping mixed teams being to shy to talk to each other otherwise.
If you want additional reinforcements you can implement that after a certain amount of time another company for each side is dropped to the match.
Only one reinforcement drop shoud be implemented or the time of a match would be to long.
If a mech is destroyed the pilot should be abled to watch his teammates and the reinforcement-drop-players alike.
I want to know who has won after all being a player from the initial drop.
Creating these complex maps will be very challenging for your map designers and it needs extensiv testing and tweaking to work properly.
It would require also a decent balance state of the game mechanics to not be a heavy blowback to the maps.
But i provided solutions above for this.
You won't need many maps like this. The complexity in options will keep even a very small amount of maps interesting and fun to play.
The testing should be done by high-level competitive units and multiple different sized groups with solo players mixed to give different feedback.
The groups including solo players will provide a baseline of metrics for balancing.
The competitive units are used to adapt fast an try to push the game mechanics to the maximum providing you with infos about major weaknesses or exploits.
There has to be an iterative cycle between testing and tweaking the maps.
What would the maps need?
1. 3 fortified targets. They need to be easy to hold for the defenders.
This can be achieved by better cover, better sightlines, higher ground, turrets, difficult but not inaccessible approach areas for the attacker.
2. The area around the fortifications needs to be pretty open in terms of cover. Only very small mechs should be able to use cover for scouting.
3. The next layer around the open area should have very good cover for the attackers.
The defender shall not see by any means approaching attackers from there fortifications.
Only when the attacker trespasses to the open area the defender must be able to see them.
The open area has to be accessible from a lot of different angles so that the defenders at the fortification don't know from where the enemy will come.
The defender has to be in the dark and on the watch. This creates tension and uncertainty as it should be.
There must be some spots where mechs with ECM can cautiously scout the fortification without being spotted by the defenders.
4. Around the good covered Area should be still enough cover that the attacker can't be spottet if they keep their heads down.
There should be some high ground points for scouts to check how the enemy is possitioned at 1 fortification.
It must not be possible to scout 2 or all 3 fortifications from 1 position.
Even 1 fortification should need more than 1 position to fully scout it to create tension and a bit of uncertainty.
The attacker must have to scout well to make the right decisions where and how to attack.
5. The area between the 3 targets needs to be balanced by distance between the targets. Reinforcements should not be possible to fast but not to slow also.
If the attacker wants to scout for the reinforcements this should only possible from moving into this area, not by the far away positions stated in point 4.
There should be also possibilities to ambush the reinforcements but not messing up the open areas of the fortifications.
6. The distances between of layers and the targets of the map must be adjustable by their design.
The imbalance in weapon range between clans and IS needs to be fixed or be considered by the map design for the map to work properly.
The distances are key to the balance of the map and need carefully done by iterative tweaks to work as intended.
Changes for weapons and game mechanics can possibly make adjustments to the distances necessary.
To Paul
Damit get some sleep or vacation or whatever, you always look like you haven't slept for a week when we see you in the dev-log-videos
A overworked lead game designer won't do good to the game. Your head needs to be fit and clear to think about the game with calm and from all angles and to be creative.
Delegate work or get more assistance to free you up or whatever you have to do to get room for breathing.
And please don't feel offended from us being rude sometimes. We only want the best for the game we love.
Over and Out
If you reached this line i have to thank you big time that you took notice and not being scared to read my way to long writing.
Knowing my thoughts are not the be all end all of things i hope i could provide you good solutions and ideas to make the game better.
Greetings from T R I A S and see you on the Battlefield
Edited by T R I A S, 16 September 2015 - 07:03 PM.
