42 replies to this topic

[jay35]

So the change noted in the patch notes that I'm referring to is this:

Quote

The targeting reticle will no longer flash when a hit is detected on a ‘Mech that is not target-locked.

It's a fundamental principle of this type of game that if the reticle reacts to hits it does so consistently so you know you're on target and not experiencing a hit-reg issue. To make that inconsistent is counterproductive in a handful of ways that should be considered:

• New/amateur player experience. They benefit from consistent hit reg feedback.
  
• Arty/air strikes no longer provide accurate feedback as to whether they hit targets.
  
• Given how much the balance pass works to obfuscate vision and information availability, this seems an unnecessary change to pile on top of that.
  
• The biggest concern though, is that it introduces a "feature" that behaves identically to hit-detection bugs, rendering troubleshooting difficult
  
• Players are unable to figure out and overcome the edge of all the wonderful invisible walls anymore. Am I hitting an invisible wall or connecting with that target I can see but is outside of sensor range? Or is it packet loss? Maybe lag? I can't tell anymore!

Reticle hit reg behavior should always be consistent across all chassis. Change all the other info warfare aspects you want, but please rethink making the reticle hit detection inconsistent.

Thanks for your consideration.

Note that there is an additional change which is the reticle changes shape instead of color on hit detection for close-range or targeted mechs. That is neither here nor there (I prefer the color change but shape change may be better for some users - ideally the final form is that we get an option to choose one or the other (or both) in the options menu).

[jay35]

It's interesting how some of the changes displayed in this PTS are very much like the sort of changes that would be made by someone who is not a high-skill player and is frustrated and tired of dying to long-range accurate weaponsfire. So the changes are directly designed to nerf that style of play. And that also explains why a sizable segment of the population is okay with those changes because they experience the same frustrations as the person who came up with those changes.

Some of the changes are dumbing down the game though, not actually creating pure balance of weapons and chassis. They obfuscate and interrupt certain skilled playstyles in order to give lower-skilled players like themselves a better chance. You can see this sort of thinking is partly influenced by their own limited and low-level play of the game and also by the thinking that they need a more newbie-friendly gameplay for a Steam launch, possibly underestimating the attraction of skill-based play.

[Foust]

I was with you on that first post, very well thought out. Well presented. The points are clear and rational.

Then on the second post you pull out your epeen and start wiggling it around.

Could it not be argued that the "skilled playstyles" should be in no way hampered by the removal of the flash if they are truly a "high-skill" player? Why cheapen the argument by implying this change is just to appease those you deem less skilled than yourself?

[Sjorpha]

I can understand the argument that this change interacts badly with hitreg issues, since you can no longer use it to compare server side hits with visual hits.

But I absolutely do not understand the argument that it "dumbs down the game" or is "aimed against high level play"

It makes the game more complex and challenging, how is that dumbing down the game? And high level players should have the easiest time to adapt to it as well. I mean, since they are better at aiming they should have less need for the red flash than the bad player has right?

Epeening isn't an argument, not a good one at least. If you're a good player this should just be another skillset for you to master. 1. Planning your competitive dropdecks positioning and playstyles so that you are able to get and maintain target locks consistently, and 2. learning to evaluate blind hits better than other players.

You can argue that it isn't the kind of change you like for this or that reason, but you can't really argue that it caters specifically to high or low level play unless it introduces randomness, which it doesn't. In fact since it adds nonrandom complexity it should reward skilled players and punish bad ones. (since skilled players will learn it easily and bad players won't)

You also talk about "high level play" as if it was a given playstyle (accurate long range fire), but that is just what happens to be strong in the current metagame. High level play is to make the winning move whatever that move is at this moment. It may be long range peek&poke right now but it may become something else. A truly competitive player doesn't have a specific playstyle, he simply recognizes the winning move and executes it better than anyone else.

look at inteviews with Daigo "the beast" Umehara for example (legendary competitive streetfighter master). He was once asked what he would do if the nerfed Ken, and his response was "it doesn't really matter to me". What the interviewer failed to grasp was that Daigo never picked Ken out of personal preference or because he was particurlarly good with Ken, he wasn't a "Ken player" in any way. It just so happened that Ken had been the winning move for a long time, and Daig just saw the winning move and made it. He didn't care one bit if the winning move bcae something else, he would still see it and still make it. THAT is high level play.

Edited by Sjorpha, 15 October 2015 - 09:00 AM.

[B L O O D W I T C H]

i don't get any hitreg response at all. There's probably something i'm missing here.
(yes, i do lock onto targets)

[Surn]

In community warfare last night some of us IS players used range to beat clan pugs. One of which is a good player who began flaunting the fact that the new system takes away the range game. "kiss er ll goodbye"

[Skarlock]

Foust, on 15 October 2015 - 07:53 AM, said:

I was with you on that first post, very well thought out. Well presented. The points are clear and rational.

Then on the second post you pull out your epeen and start wiggling it around.

Could it not be argued that the "skilled playstyles" should be in no way hampered by the removal of the flash if they are truly a "high-skill" player? Why cheapen the argument by implying this change is just to appease those you deem less skilled than yourself?

First off, skill doesn't trump invisible walls and other obvious technical issues in the game. Second, you're using a "No True Scottsman" fallacy by simply tacking on the word "true" to validate your counterpoint. After all, no TRUE skilled player of this game would say that accurate feedback on the success or failure of a given action is unnecessary. See how easy that is? I just throw the word true out there and all of a sudden, I've countered your counter point without actually saying anything or providing any refuting points or evidence. Oh wait, I haven't countered anything, have I? Yeah. As for "couldn't it be argued", that's just yet again, saying there is an argument without actually making one and opening it up to criticism and scrutiny. Lastly, just because you don't like the tone of an argument it has absolutely nothing to do with the arguments validity. Criticize the tone if you want but no matter how abrasive someone is in saying something, it doesn't make it factually or logically wrong, or weaken the argument in any way.

[Mister Blastman]

I have trouble visually processing motion. It ends up being a blur. As such, I can't tell a hit between a regular crosshair as it is a swirl of yellow in front of my eyes. I would love for the X to also be red, if at all possible. That way I can at least tell something changed.

[SirNotlag]

As a sniper myself I like this change because it makes information warfare more powerful. It doesn't really affect me that much though because my ping has always been so low I have never once encountered a hit reg issue and i like to use PPCs which give off a massive plume of sparks when they impact a mech so I can tell when the shot has landed visually. But if I have target lock then I have a confirmed hit on my target, and so far all its done is make me really appreciate my fellow mechs that get close enough to gather info on the enemy.

I actually hope they keep this change.

Edited by SirNotlag, 15 October 2015 - 09:15 AM.

[Foust]

Skarlock, on 15 October 2015 - 08:55 AM, said:

First off, skill doesn't trump invisible walls and other obvious technical issues in the game.
<SNIP>
Criticize the tone if you want but no matter how abrasive someone is in saying something, it doesn't make it factually or logically wrong, or weaken the argument in any way.

Invisible walls and technical issues are valid concerns regarding this proposed change. We agree.

Tone does not change fact or logic. We agree.

Discounting this proposed change as only useful for those that fall below some arbitrary skill threshold is wrong.

[Skarlock]

Foust, on 15 October 2015 - 09:16 AM, said:

Discounting this proposed change as only useful for those that fall below some arbitrary skill threshold is wrong.

Well, that's not really what I read into jay35s post. From my interpretation, he's criticizing the supposed thinking behind making such a change to essentially nerf long range combat. We can't really know if it's true or not (mainly because I believe PGI would never give us insight on that level), it's just his opinion. In my personal opinion though, it's kind of a moot point because you can simply use equipment such as BAP/CAP and sensor range modules to get fairly far detection. I also think lights with extended sensor range can spot from way, way farther than normal. For example, an adder with a CAP and sensor range module has a WHOPPING 1800 meter detection range. I think the end result is people will simply focus on extending sensor ranges with minimal investment in tonnage and module slots and not much will really change, other than maybe how people play Boreal in CW.

Edited by Skarlock, 15 October 2015 - 09:43 AM.

[Livewyr]

It might also be, jay35, that Lasers, especially longer range lasers, are overpowered due to their mechanics, compared to other weapons.


(Not the least of which is having the same rate of fire regardless of their range...)

[jay35]

The problem with their implementation of this change to hitreg feedback is that they have made an inherent inconsistency.

FPS games either have reticle hit feedback or they don't. But they do not do it halfway, where it's intermittent, because that is confusing to players and resembles a bug, netcode issues, and generates new player confusion/frustration.

Either have reticle feedback for hitreg or don't have it, but having it only work some of the time is the most problematic part. It's a poorly thought-out mechanic that is by nature an implementation of a broken system.

Edited by jay35, 15 October 2015 - 09:30 PM.

[McGrizzled]

jay35, on 15 October 2015 - 09:29 PM, said:

The problem with their implementation of this change to hitreg feedback is that they have made an inherent inconsistency.

FPS games either have reticle hit feedback or they don't. But they do not do it halfway, where it's intermittent, because that is confusing to players and resembles a bug, netcode issues, and generates new player confusion/frustration.

Either have reticle feedback for hitreg or don't have it, but having it only work some of the time is the most problematic part. It's a poorly thought-out mechanic that is by nature an implementation of a broken system.

Intermittent and inconsistent would mean that it is random or sporadic, which it is not. I believe you are looking for Conditional, it only happens in certain situations. But since they have told us how to make it happen, it is predictable and I don't see where you see any actual inconsistency.

You have a mech targeted, your sensors can then reliably detect hits, you get feedback in the reticle. Its a shortcut to having to check the paper doll or the % health for hits, just like the recharge dots for your weapon groups are a shortcut from having to check your weapon list to see if they are ready to fire. The general implementation seems fine to me from a technical standpoint.

Now, I can see where it is definitely a concern for firing at hidden walls, but then technically hidden walls are the problem, not the feedback. I can see where it is a detriment for new players trying to learn to lead targets, and that by itself is enough I think to warrant reevaluating how it's implemented. I also agree that the mechwarrior in the seat would probably see hits better in the cockpit than we the player can sometimes see on the screen, so that would be another justification for changing it as a QoL improvement.

Edited by McGrizzled, 16 October 2015 - 11:08 AM.

[jay35]

Either have hit feedback or don't have it, but having it only work some of the time is the problematic part because it mimics packetloss, hitreg issues, lag/latency issues, and hitting invisible walls that still plague many maps in this game. Basically, they are proposing to introduce a "feature" that behaves identically to at least four types of extant problems in MWO.

[Summon3r]

no red reticle to indicate hits is not good imho, if your doin quick hill humps or corner humps to snap shoot say a ppc style weapon or a ballistic and you dont target why should you not know if you hit or not?

[Livewyr]

Summon3r, on 17 October 2015 - 11:46 AM, said:

no red reticle to indicate hits is not good imho, if your doin quick hill humps or corner humps to snap shoot say a ppc style weapon or a ballistic and you dont target why should you not know if you hit or not?

Because your pilot is not omniscient?

In ABA therapy, that's called "Theory of Mind."

If you want your mech to tell you that you hit a target because you cannot visually verify it yourself...lock the target. The "recon by fire" use of lasers and arty is silly.

Edited by Livewyr, 17 October 2015 - 04:30 PM.

[oldradagast]

I think it's hilariously stupid. If there's one thing this game needs, it's another annoying, illogical, and non-standard game mechanic to attract new players, such as not knowing if your weapons hit or not.

On the plus side, it will vastly reduce the ability of players to complain about the lousy hit-reg and ghost walls on maps since you'll never know if your shots against unlocked targets were counted as hits anyway! Brilliant!

jay35, on 15 October 2015 - 09:29 PM, said:

Either have hit feedback or don't have it, but having it only work some of the time is the problematic part because it mimics packetloss, hitreg issues, lag/latency issues, and hitting invisible walls that still plague many maps in this game. Basically, they are proposing to introduce a "feature" that behaves identically to at will help mask least four types of extant problems in MWO.

Fixed that for yah.

Edited by oldradagast, 17 October 2015 - 04:37 PM.

[Livewyr]

oldragagast, at the risk of stirring your reactionary obstinate disposition once more; how is it not logical to not know whether you hit your target or not without seeing it, or having your mech see it for you?

Theory of Mind.

If you didn't see it, and your friend didn't see it. Neither of you know.

[oldradagast]

Livewyr, on 17 October 2015 - 05:27 PM, said:

oldragagast, at the risk of stirring your reactionary obstinate disposition once more; how is it not logical to not know whether you hit your target or not without seeing it, or having your mech see it for you?

Theory of Mind.

If you didn't see it, and your friend didn't see it. Neither of you know.

I counter with "Theory of designing a decent game" and "theory of if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

This is a game, not reality, nor some philosophical simulation, or whatever you're getting at. Also, real war isn't fun. Games about war should be. They should also be consistent and easy for new users to play. This change just masks the game's damage registration and invisible wall issues and confuses new players, so it is bad design.

SirNotlag, on 15 October 2015 - 09:13 AM, said:

As a sniper myself I like this change because it makes information warfare more powerful.

And if there's one thing this game needs, it's changes that favor sniping and camping... right?

Edited by oldradagast, 17 October 2015 - 05:52 PM.