22 replies to this topic

[Bergonix]

Dear Russ, dear PGI.

First:
I definitely think that you ‘re willing to balance the game and give us a good game. I’m in the fortunate position to have some game design and balancing experience on several games. So I know the ungrateful situation you are. As far as I’ve learned most players have nice ideas – the problem is that these ideas mostly do not solve their problem or only a specific part of it. The biggest problem for the game designer is now to get the “real” problem / cause out of all the ideas and isolated problems. Especially as the problem ppl tell you may not be their real problem.

But that’s not why I write this text.

There have been a lot of things in the last days and weeks. And to be honest I’m actually thinking to follow some of my clan buddies and cancel my IIC, Warhammer and Marauder. Actually I’m not sure if – at the end of all the balancing – I still play the game. Because I don’t see what you intend to achieve. Because it feels like you’re nerving skill and competitiveness. Because it feels like you’re only busting a meta without / instead of giving an alternative.
But to cancel it without talking to you feels a bit odd to me.
So… What’s the reason I think of this?

1. There’s the post from Russ (I’m pretty sure he regrets it) that he thinks of disabling the arm lock function for experienced players. Not because I care about the arm lock. I don’t think any of the top tier players will mention it. It’s because you really thinking of nerving the better players!

2. The tonnage system in groups. If you play in large groups you’re normally than a team made of smaller groups. If you play in a large group you normally play often, look after you teammates, listen to the advices of your comrades. You’re getting better. You learn. And as a reward for playing the game often you get punished because you do teamplay in a teamgame. I bet a group of tier one or two – not talking to each other will beat a group of tier 4 talking to each other. I hate that I’m not allowed to drive my Dire Wolf in a 12 man group drop. So why buying assaults if I’m not able to play them in a group?
There are some other things that support this feelings, but these are only feelings.
Next are all those weapon nervs especially lasers. I’m a ghost bear - I play clan in competitive drops. And before anyone suspects: Yes, the lasers had to be nerved. That’s ok. But should they be nerved to death? Clans don’t really have a reasonable AC compared to the IS. Those multiple bullets mostly spread the dmg.

Now you could say: Hey, lock and it will all be fine. With lasers you could no longer do full dmg on range as any good player twists his torso and twisting often means no lock / loose of lock. What’s next? Nerv IS AC which I suggest will be part of the new meta? What I’m missing here is an opportunity for clans. And again: Clan AC’s are crap. It’s easy to do 600 or 700 dmg with an 5 uac5 dire. As long as the enemy doesn’t move nor twist it’s fine. A High-Alpha Dire will lose the dps race but I’m pretty sure he wins the fight.

So what’s the conclusion of all this?

First: Russ / PGI pls don’t try to balance competitive players against other players. Competitive players will always be better than others. That will never work and only result in competitive players leaving the game.

Edith: Deleted the last sentence as it gave a push in a direction not intended.

Second: Tell the ppl what are you intending to do. They don’t need any step, but it’s easier if they know the goal that should be reached. Furthermore I’m confident that everything you do in game design should be checked if it fits to the vision. I may not like your change but if I’d know the reason of it, I’d more likely accept it. Vision is the key.

Third: Dig to the cause of a problem. I’m not sure if you do it. Sometimes it seemed like you only work on the effect. I can only have suggestions. And I’m interested if my suggestions are right or wrong. I miss too much data I miss data that only you have.

I’d like to continue to play the game. I don’t know if you read it or even if you answer it. In the end it’s your choice. But pls think of it. I may be wrong in some or even all of my statements because of a wrong POV.

If there’s something unclear pls be my guest.

Sry for the wall of text. At the end I feel, that I shouldn't have wrote it...

Edited by Bergonix, 06 November 2015 - 11:50 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

What's your tier?

[Gamuray]

cdlord, on 06 November 2015 - 07:45 AM, said:

What's your tier?

Who cares what tier he's in!? That is a pointless question with regards to his post!

@Bergonix

I feel the same way with their changes. Most of the time it addresses the effects of a problem and not the roots. (Ahem... modern society much?)

Though, the new changes seem to be digging a bit more in depth. I can see what the laser changes were meant to do, but I feel like it should have been a "lock=convergence for lock target distance, no lock, no convergence" deal. It would have been better than the outright reduced range and would be easier to use and could be added to ballistics even.

This reason is the same one that I cite for not buying into more packs. I'm waiting for the game to "relaunch" into a non-beta, because right now, with the total balance pass coming up and rescales and whatnot, it feels more "beta-esque" than launched.

[Raggedyman]

Bergonix, on 06 November 2015 - 07:39 AM, said:

Sry for the wall of text. At the end I feel, that I shouldn't have wrote it...

The edit button is your friend.
Clarify in your mind what you want to say, rewite it in a clear and as concise a manner as possible (without removing the meaning/important bits), and then use the edit function to repost it where your current post is. Put an "edited to remove wall of text" at the bottom and everyone (or at least those who aren't jackasses) will be totally cool about it

[CDLord HHGD]

Gamuray, on 06 November 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

Who cares what tier he's in!? That is a pointless question with regards to his post!

@Bergonix

I feel the same way with their changes. Most of the time it addresses the effects of a problem and not the roots. (Ahem... modern society much?)

Though, the new changes seem to be digging a bit more in depth. I can see what the laser changes were meant to do, but I feel like it should have been a "lock=convergence for lock target distance, no lock, no convergence" deal. It would have been better than the outright reduced range and would be easier to use and could be added to ballistics even.

This reason is the same one that I cite for not buying into more packs. I'm waiting for the game to "relaunch" into a non-beta, because right now, with the total balance pass coming up and rescales and whatnot, it feels more "beta-esque" than launched.

Only a certain segment of players tout the superior-ness of the "comp" crowd like it's something to be proud of and holding his purchases hostage is super lame. I asked for his tier so I could get a proper perspective instead of making assumptions.

[RussianWolf]

I've never lost a lock from someone twisting. I may not be able to land the shots where I want them, but the lock stays active unless an ecm comes in range or line of sight is lost.

[CDLord HHGD]

RussianWolf, on 06 November 2015 - 08:21 AM, said:

I've never lost a lock from someone twisting. I may not be able to land the shots where I want them, but the lock stays active unless an ecm comes in range or line of sight is lost.

Twisting won't cause a lock to be lost, only helps spread the damage (unless its PPFLD) allowing you to soak more before internal components of any one part of your mech is exposed. Breaking LoS with the attacker (or any of his friends) or introducing ECM is the only way to break lock (and ECM may not help you if other circumstances are in play).

Edited by cdlord, 06 November 2015 - 08:38 AM.

[TLBFestus]

Bergonix, on 06 November 2015 - 07:39 AM, said:

First: Russ / PGI pls don’t try to balance competitive players against other players. Competitive players will always be better than others. That will never work and only result in competitive players leaving the game. And – I’m sure of this - losing the competitive players will kill the game.

I just don't buy this "losing the competitive players will kill the game." claptrap. It always sounds to my ears more like, "If you don't fix the game the way WE want it, WE will leave and the game is dead (to us).

Now, maybe you just need to explain your definition of competitive is. To me, it's the 12 mans, Russ' vaunted E-Sport players. If it's those you are referring to then sorry, but you are wrong.

"Competitive" players insisted on a Hardcore CW. They got it, they resisted any alterations to it that would make it more palatable to casual players. It's dead/dying not because of the lack of "Competitive" players, but because of the lack of players period.

You see, the vast majority of players are CASUAL. They are the backbone of the game. Especially in a game with a small player population. You might be able to argue that "Competitive" players spend more on the game and you'd possibly be right,......on a per capita basis. There might be more Whales as a percentage in the "Competitive" population, but in the end the casuals are more important;

- they probably spend more, albeit less per player but more overall
- they populate the game. They are 80-90% of the population and as such ARE the game.
- their opinions matter, at least as much if not more than "Competitive" players. I know you guys don't like hearing that but it's true.

The hard truth is that if PGI has to pick a group to listen to, I'm going to go with the opinion that they are going to cater to the bigger group that pays the bills and populates the game.

If there is a solution that would suite "Competitive" players it's going to come when PGI figures out how to give both types a players an enjoyable experience. In my opinion that's going to come when they make premium time a much, much better product that can allow "Competitive" players to properly organize their own tournaments and games without trying to drag casual players in to fill it out.

[Triordinant]

Bergonix, on 06 November 2015 - 07:39 AM, said:

And – I’m sure of this - losing the competitive players will kill the game.

This statement is completely false.

[Appogee]

Addressing a letter to Russ at the General Forum is about as productive as writing a letter to Santa at the South Pole.

[Bergonix]

Wow lots of comments. Thanks. Ok - have to write this from my mobile, so...

Competitve Players give you the flaws of your game design. May it by play or by words. They always tend to get the last bit out of the game to win. By watching them you could learn a lot about your own game. They find ways you dont even think of. Thats why you need them.

To be honest there is too much said to the "no competitves will kill the game" sentence. Even if I think its true, it gives the part a push in the wrong direction. At the end you jeed both. The key is, that you cannot balance the competitives against the casuals.
I'll edit the post later.

[DAYLEET]

Bergonix, on 06 November 2015 - 09:42 AM, said:

Competitve Players give you the flaws of your game design.

But you better not try to fix those flaws because nerf is bad and i want my toys.

[Bergonix]

DAYLEET, on 06 November 2015 - 10:01 AM, said:

But you better not try to fix those flaws because nerf is bad and i want my toys.

Definetly depends on the kind of player. A good competitive player wants a balanced game.

On the other hand flaws don't necessarily mean a nerv. That depends on the cause of the flaw.

[CDLord HHGD]

Bergonix, on 06 November 2015 - 10:38 AM, said:

Definetly depends on the kind of player. A good competitive player wants a balanced game.

On the other hand flaws don't necessarily mean a nerv. That depends on the cause of the flaw.

Have you SEEN the responses to my "exploitation of a flawed design" comment? I call BS on the "competitive player blah blah blah. I've been told that before so I put it out there, if that's the case, come to my TS and drop with me. Show me you're willing to play without your meta, or show me the error of my ways (I can bankroll a meta build or two). NOBODY has showed up yet. It's an open invite too. Until they put their game time where their mouth is, they are relegated to mount tryhard, home of the t1 master race.

[Coolant]

Gamuray, on 06 November 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

Who cares what tier he's in!? That is a pointless question with regards to his post!

It is a valid question because gameplay differs according to tier. I have friends in the same unit and they describe gameplay differently than I experience because they are in different tiers. It is a relevant question.

I have seen posts recently about never seeing certain maps, never getting to play certain game modes, and it's all capping on certain modes. I am not experiencing this, so perhaps it is a tier-related thing or at least a factor.

[Bergonix]

cdlord, on 06 November 2015 - 11:38 AM, said:

Have you SEEN the responses to my "exploitation of a flawed design" comment? I call BS on the "competitive player blah blah blah. I've been told that before so I put it out there, if that's the case, come to my TS and drop with me. Show me you're willing to play without your meta, or show me the error of my ways (I can bankroll a meta build or two). NOBODY has showed up yet. It's an open invite too. Until they put their game time where their mouth is, they are relegated to mount tryhard, home of the t1 master race.

Forcing ppl not to play meta is the same as forcing the ppl to play it. And I've talked to competitive players who used the meta and still said that it need to be nerved. These are the ppl you should to listen to.

And I'm not fighting for a meta. I'm speaking of balancing a game. It seems like you're battling against me, where I think there's no need for a battle.

I am willing to drop nonmeta. I even own a Mist Lynx only equipped with tag, narc and a small laser. It's horrible for your KD, but it could be really fun.

Speaking of tier: As it's asked again: I'm tier 3 on my way to tier 2. But I have to search if the MM uses tiers in groupdrops, too. 'Cause I prefer groupdrops. In singleplayer there are differences in gameplay. But these differences have nothing to do with my post. If there are parts that looks like, I've got to change them.

@cdlord: could you pls drop me a link via pn? I'm not at home will have a look at it later.

Edited by Bergonix, 06 November 2015 - 12:46 PM.

[CDLord HHGD]

Bergonix, on 06 November 2015 - 12:12 PM, said:

Forcing ppl not to play meta is the same as forcing the ppl to play it. And I've talked to competitive players who used the meta and still said that it need to be nerved. These are the ppl you should to listen to.

And I'm not fighting for a meta. I'm speaking of balancing a game. It seems like you're battling against me, where I think there's no need for a battle.

I am willing to drop nonmeta. I even own a Mist Lynx only equipped with tag, narc and a small laser. It's horrible for your KD, but it could be really fun.

Speaking of tier: As it's asked again: I'm tier 3 on my way to tier 2. But I have to search if the MM uses tiers in groupdrops, too. 'Cause I prefer groupdrops. In singleplayer there are differences in gameplay. But these differences have nothing to do with my post. If there are parts that looks like, I've got to change them.

@cdlord: could you pls drop me a link via pn? I'm not at home will have a look at it later.

Ok, knowing you are T3 I can assume you have similar experience to my own. For me there is no distinction between the "comp' crowd and the T1 master race who still preside over mount tryhard and have yet to, despite telling me otherwise, prove that "they want a balanced game". Why do they have to prove to me? They don't. But they keep coming at me telling me how wrong I am. I gave them a chance to prove it. No takers so no reason for me to let up on my rhetoric.

PGI's worst segment is the comp crowd and the game would be far better without them.

Your Mist Lynx build is intriguing and something that I would try. When I was leveling my MLX I did it with nothing but a PPC (and Clan PPCs with their damage spread are tough to use).

Info for my TS on the HHGD website linked in my signature. I am usually on Friday nights but I have to work tonight so I may not be on (depends on how late, the customer I am working with is notorious for late night debacles). I will be on Sunday evening before 7pm MST (Walking Dead with the family).

[Mudhutwarrior]

I was told once by a competive player that anything PGI does to balance really won't affect them because they are so good they can readily adjust to any change.

So I guess thats not true and competive players need crutches?

[Bergonix]

cdlord, on 06 November 2015 - 01:01 PM, said:

Ok, knowing you are T3 I can assume you have similar experience to my own. For me there is no distinction between the "comp' crowd and the T1 master race who still preside over mount tryhard and have yet to, despite telling me otherwise, prove that "they want a balanced game". Why do they have to prove to me? They don't. But they keep coming at me telling me how wrong I am. I gave them a chance to prove it. No takers so no reason for me to let up on my rhetoric.

You'll always have different ppl. I've read some post of Tier 1 guys that are not like you say. So don't blame everyone. The question is always what your playstyle is. I've done a post in my clan forum. Maybe I'll send you a translation.


@Mudhutwarrior:
They don't need crutches. Good players will look at the changes and adapt them. There will always be a meta (and there were severaly in history of MOW). The meta only changes. As long as the balance the game and not the players - they are right.

[Random Carnage]

When i see "POV", I have to quickly check that I'm in the right tab...