179 replies to this topic

[Odanan]

Sereglach, on 28 February 2016 - 08:03 AM, said:

Honestly, I fully expected a package of one of the lights (you forgot the Valkyrie), Phoenix Hawk, Crusader, and Longbow, with the other two lights as a reinforcement package. That's now out of the question. So, we'll have to see what happens. Maybe the individual mech sales are doing well enough that they just plan on going back to those for a while, if not as a constant thing. Only time will tell. Otherwise, I can certainly live without the "Ost" series, and quads are out of the question.

Agreed.

Sereglach, on 28 February 2016 - 08:03 AM, said:

Regardless, it's a point of curiosity for me, but not a major point. I could care less until the flamer is in a situation that I'd actually consider it fixed . . . and the crap we got for February was far from a fix, as the panicked exploit closing clearly showed (and now the piles of convoluted systems that they're going to try to represent on a HUD . . . the simple fix is there, it's just whether PGI will take it by the time it's said and done). Until then I'm not spending any money. Everyone has their hitch, and that's mine. It's a pity, too, because I'd love to buy a Rifleman and Phoenix Hawk collection, but principles are principles.

I thought of all people, you would be happy with the new flamers. What do you want, exactly?

[Sereglach]

Odanan, on 28 February 2016 - 11:03 AM, said:

I thought of all people, you would be happy with the new flamers. What do you want, exactly?

Well, for one, as stated in the patch and hot fix threads, it was a huge "I told you so" to PGI because they failed to actually fix the Flamers, and left a huge glaring exploit behind. Now, rather than fix the inherent problem, they decided to throw more invisible and convoluted mechanics onto the problem to call it a "fix". Numbers tuning followed by extra complexity isn't a fix, sadly.

I, among many others, advocated for fixed flat values that were straight forward. For example, if it did a flat out 2-3 Heat DPS and generated a flat 1.0 HPS for the wielder then it's straight forward. It'd be highly functional, there'd be no "magic heat neutrality" for the wielder, any shooting of the flamer would have a cost, it'd still be a stream weapon, and the exploit would have been fixed from the beginning. My "ideal" results would be something like 1.0 DPS, 1.0 Heat DPS, and .5 HPS per flamer at fixed values.

Otherwise, while I'd prefer the weapon do actual damage (it does so in lore and TT rules) if PGI is obsessed with having it do zero physical damage (because .1 DPS is close enough to zero), then I'd at least want it to have the fixed, flat, and straightforward values. I want an actual fix to the weapon, and not what we got. Numbers tuning -which exposed the long known exploit on an "Armageddon" level- is not an actual fix. The old acceleration/exponential mechanics just need to go away.

I'm worried about Russ's statement regarding "new HUD elements" because that's trying to display a LOT for the hidden and convoluted mechanics of the weapon. We've got a 4.75 second "magic heat neutrality" before it generates any heat (which that is just wrong), and it's tied to ALL flamers, not individually. We've got a "magic pseudo-cooldown window" of 4.75 seconds where -if you fire the weapon for even a millisecond- then the timer is reset and your heat generation picks up right where it left off. Then, on top of it, we've got the exponential heat generation that constantly accelerates the heat gain and heat damage of the weapons, with unknown formulas (without code digging, at least).

I don't think all of that is going to be successfully shown with a simple new HUD element . . . let alone the fact that they're looking to redo the heat scale, so the weapon would need to be readdressed . . . again. If a new heat scale comes out and the Flamer's inherent problems aren't addressed, then we'll have this problem -akin to the hotfix- all over again.

PGI has the simple solution in front of them, they just need to reach out and take it. That's what myself, and others, have been trying to get them to acknowledge for a while now.

EDIT: Russ said there'd be "another conversation" over that functionality, and THAT is what I was hoping to hear about for the roadmap, or at least for PGI's considerations moving forward.

Edited by Sereglach, 28 February 2016 - 12:38 PM.

[Mordric]

March Sounds really exciting!! I can not wait to see the updates!! sounds like the updates are moving towards a deeper game play..

[Master Maniac]

I laugh at the suggestion that the current numbers on who's playing what are indicative of the effectiveness of Lights. Almost everybody is Heavy not because they are intrinsically better - everybody's Heavy because the newest 'Mechs are predominantly Heavy. People want to play the new thing because they've been playing the old thing for so long, and everybody's jonesing to get a match in one with the silly 3 3 3 3 rule in place.

Same thing could be observed with the Stormcrow - everybody was in a Medium for several weeks straight.

You people really don't remember the constant Light Rushes that were a thing back in the day? I mean, really?

Also, edited before accusations of "you're just an Assault that likes to one-shot everyone."

I own one Assault. I sold my Boar's Head for being absolutely worthless. My favorite way to play is high-speed laser vomit, so, yeah, that claim is invalid.

I'm sick of *having* to play that way, because everything else is just straight up nerfed into oblivion.

Edited by Master Maniac, 28 February 2016 - 04:56 PM.

[Wildstreak]

Master Maniac, on 28 February 2016 - 04:48 PM, said:

I laugh at the suggestion that the current numbers on who's playing what are indicative of the effectiveness of Lights. Almost everybody is Heavy not because they are intrinsically better - everybody's Heavy because the newest 'Mechs are predominantly Heavy. People want to play the new thing because they've been playing the old thing for so long, and everybody's jonesing to get a match in one with the silly 3 3 3 3 rule in place.

You don't know 3/3/3/3 is gone?
It is.
Most of my matches at peak times are 4A/4H/3M/1L, 3A/4H/3M/2L or 4A/3H/3M/2L. Rare is the match with 3 Lights, even rarer though it happens with 4.

[Sereglach]

Master Maniac, on 28 February 2016 - 04:48 PM, said:

People want to play the new thing because they've been playing the old thing for so long, and everybody's jonesing to get a match in one with the silly 3 3 3 3 rule in place.

Actually, the matchmaker "release valves" for the 3/3/3/3 rule loosen up even faster when new mechs are released, because PGI is fully aware that people are going to be wanting to play their new shiny mechs. Therefore, it's actually quite easy to get a match with the new mechs when they're released.

As far as the 3/3/3/3 goes on a normal basis, however, Wildstreak is and isn't right at the same time. 3/3/3/3 is still the baseline at which the matchmaker tries to find matches. Of course, it's yet another valve that is "loosened" over time (like PSR matching). So, while MWO tries to make 3/3/3/3 matches, the queues just don't allow for it, because lights are so rare. It's basically impossible for the matchmaker to make a perfect match when upwards of 40% of the queue is heavy but <10% is light. The valve is quickly being relaxed for those heavier mechs, which are more-often-than-not seeding the matches (because they're the most prolific), and the matchmaker just has to use what mechs it can get.

That's why, especially at peak times, the game makes matches that are lopsided towards the heavier weight classes . . . it's to control wait times and keep the match queue moving. Remember, when 3/3/3/3 was first implemented it was an absolute and unflinching rule. The wait times for anything other than a light were moving to 10 minutes or more. Of course, I don't even think that lasted 2 days past the patch.

Master Maniac, on 28 February 2016 - 04:48 PM, said:

You people really don't remember the constant Light Rushes that were a thing back in the day? I mean, really?

You mean the light rushes that happened in CW because all you had to do was destroy Omega, it had no shielding, there were no other objective generators, and a pack of Firestarters or Mist Lynxes could wipe out its very low hit-point threshold before defending mechs could react?

That had nothing to do with the overall effectiveness of lights. It had to do with a very flawed initial implementation of CW match dynamics. I'd say there've been drastic improvements since then; and that is the only reason you do not see light rushes anymore, unless it is a last ditch effort on an invasion match.

No, the lack of lights in the public matchmaking queue is very much because of their lack of effectiveness vs. larger weight classes. The current meta of laser vomit utterly demolishes lights in short order . . . especially IS lights that carry IS XL engines and die as soon as any torso is destroyed. It is very difficult to dodge point-and-click weapons (even if they have a burn duration) that have pinpoint accuracy . . . especially when larger mechs can fire large quantities and/or large damage values of them in very short order.

The lights that are out there, and are doing reasonably well, are only doing so because they're getting pretty good at hit-and-run tactics, wolf-packing, and only operating within the main allied force to pick on already weakened targets. Also, the only really good ones are also running well within the bounds of the laser-vomit-high-alpha meta of the game.

[Kyrie]

Was there any meaningful discussion of CW plans in the 4 hours this TH lasted?

[NocturnalBeast]

Sereglach, on 28 February 2016 - 08:03 AM, said:

Honestly, I fully expected a package of one of the lights (you forgot the Valkyrie), Phoenix Hawk, Crusader, and Longbow, with the other two lights as a reinforcement package. That's now out of the question. So, we'll have to see what happens. Maybe the individual mech sales are doing well enough that they just plan on going back to those for a while, if not as a constant thing. Only time will tell. Otherwise, I can certainly live without the "Ost" series, and quads are out of the question.

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

Regardless, it's a point of curiosity for me, but not a major point. I could care less until the flamer is in a situation that I'd actually consider it fixed . . . and the crap we got for February was far from a fix, as the panicked exploit closing clearly showed (and now the piles of convoluted systems that they're going to try to represent on a HUD . . . the simple fix is there, it's just whether PGI will take it by the time it's said and done). Until then I'm not spending any money. Everyone has their hitch, and that's mine. It's a pity, too, because I'd love to buy a Rifleman and Phoenix Hawk collection, but principles are principles.

The Unseen are cash cows, there is no way that PGI will not add as many as possible. Plus Russ said possibly Wednesday for the Phoenix Hawk pre order (and hero mech reveal)!

[Asmosis]

would the hero mech be the one from the original BT game? I think there was some hero in a phoenix hawk that rescues you at the end or something (I never got past the color key code thing as a kid lol).

[Sigmar Sich]

Thank you Russ, thank you NGNG team! This townhalls always make me feel better about this game, and boost my hope that one day MWO will be great. (and listen to you was fun, even after reading notes. Never do it sober again =) )

Especially this one, about decreasing alpha spam, and returning to slower destructions. I would love it.
But i have one concern - more time between the alphas - would it not encourage players to even more passive gameplay, with longer sitting in cover between the alpha strikes? I don't like how this game feels like World of Tanks style peek-and-shot. I hope new system will discourage such gameplay..
And i only wish you revive your rebalance, as it was before it ended as just another quirk pass...

Well, one day MWO will be great. Thats what keeps me playing from time to time, saving appetite for better times.

[Zolaz]

Kyrie, on 28 February 2016 - 08:43 PM, said:

Was there any meaningful discussion of CW plans in the 4 hours this TH lasted?

The drunk in the Town Hall spent 2 min of those 4 hours to let you know everything is going great, CW Phase 3 should be out April 19th. There were no details given we were told to watch the old presentation about CW Phase 3 if we had any questions.

[General Pete]

Asmosis, on 29 February 2016 - 12:07 AM, said:

would the hero mech be the one from the original BT game? I think there was some hero in a phoenix hawk that rescues you at the end or something (I never got past the color key code thing as a kid lol).

Jason Youngblood!

[Kyrie]

Zolaz, on 29 February 2016 - 04:27 AM, said:

The drunk in the Town Hall spent 2 min of those 4 hours to let you know everything is going great, CW Phase 3 should be out April 19th. There were no details given we were told to watch the old presentation about CW Phase 3 if we had any questions.

LOL. Ok, thanks for the info. :-)

[Livewyr]

That was hard to listen to...

4 hours of Russ begging people to be excited about the "new" content. (This is what happens with nearly 4 years of dragging your player base through the ringer with the same promises.)

[Tvrdoglavi]

Ed Steele, on 28 February 2016 - 10:43 PM, said:

The Unseen are cash cows, there is no way that PGI will not add as many as possible. Plus Russ said possibly Wednesday for the Phoenix Hawk pre order (and hero mech reveal)!

Where do you get your numbers from? Those single chasis packs are a terrible value, I would never buy one.

[Tvrdoglavi]

Alan Hicks, on 27 February 2016 - 08:58 AM, said:

Well then, if half of the MWO population is cheating then I feel like the other half, complete but satisfied virgins. I think no matter how big or small in numbers cheaters may be here, they should be banned or severely restricted when discovered. This is a complex simulator and good knowledge, skill and practice don't come easy.

Cheaters at every game are the disease any entertaining community.

I like what Elite Dangerous does to cheaters. They call it a stealth ban. The send the cheaters to a spearate instance of the game without other players wihout any notification.
MWO could send them to a separate instance with other cheaters. I wonder how long it would take for them to figure it out.

[NocturnalBeast]

Tvrdoglavi, on 29 February 2016 - 11:58 AM, said:

Where do you get your numbers from? Those single chasis packs are a terrible value, I would never buy one.

There are no numbers in the text that you quoted. And by "cash cow" I mean that the unseen Mechs are / will be very profitable for PGI, which does not necessarily have any correlation with the value to the purchaser.

[Luscious Dan]

Sereglach, on 28 February 2016 - 12:34 PM, said:

Well, for one, as stated in the patch and hot fix threads, it was a huge "I told you so" to PGI because they failed to actually fix the Flamers, and left a huge glaring exploit behind. Now, rather than fix the inherent problem, they decided to throw more invisible and convoluted mechanics onto the problem to call it a "fix". Numbers tuning followed by extra complexity isn't a fix, sadly.

I, among many others, advocated for fixed flat values that were straight forward. For example, if it did a flat out 2-3 Heat DPS and generated a flat 1.0 HPS for the wielder then it's straight forward. It'd be highly functional, there'd be no "magic heat neutrality" for the wielder, any shooting of the flamer would have a cost, it'd still be a stream weapon, and the exploit would have been fixed from the beginning. My "ideal" results would be something like 1.0 DPS, 1.0 Heat DPS, and .5 HPS per flamer at fixed values.

Otherwise, while I'd prefer the weapon do actual damage (it does so in lore and TT rules) if PGI is obsessed with having it do zero physical damage (because .1 DPS is close enough to zero), then I'd at least want it to have the fixed, flat, and straightforward values. I want an actual fix to the weapon, and not what we got. Numbers tuning -which exposed the long known exploit on an "Armageddon" level- is not an actual fix. The old acceleration/exponential mechanics just need to go away.

I'm worried about Russ's statement regarding "new HUD elements" because that's trying to display a LOT for the hidden and convoluted mechanics of the weapon. We've got a 4.75 second "magic heat neutrality" before it generates any heat (which that is just wrong), and it's tied to ALL flamers, not individually. We've got a "magic pseudo-cooldown window" of 4.75 seconds where -if you fire the weapon for even a millisecond- then the timer is reset and your heat generation picks up right where it left off. Then, on top of it, we've got the exponential heat generation that constantly accelerates the heat gain and heat damage of the weapons, with unknown formulas (without code digging, at least).

I don't think all of that is going to be successfully shown with a simple new HUD element . . . let alone the fact that they're looking to redo the heat scale, so the weapon would need to be readdressed . . . again. If a new heat scale comes out and the Flamer's inherent problems aren't addressed, then we'll have this problem -akin to the hotfix- all over again.

PGI has the simple solution in front of them, they just need to reach out and take it. That's what myself, and others, have been trying to get them to acknowledge for a while now.

EDIT: Russ said there'd be "another conversation" over that functionality, and THAT is what I was hoping to hear about for the roadmap, or at least for PGI's considerations moving forward.

My "vision" for the Flamer gauge, based on my understanding of the mechanics, is this:

Something on the right side of the targeting reticule, similar (but not identical) to MASC. Or to the left of MASC. Doesn't really matter.

The level of the gauge represents the amount of additional heat generated by each flamer if you were to fire it at the current time. It takes 4.75s to fill the "safe" green portion of the gauge (regardless of how many flamers you're firing), and the level goes down when none are being fired. When you get into the red zone, you're triggering that rapidly increasing amount of heat generation if you fire.

Should be reasonably intuitive IMO.

Edited by Luscious Dan, 29 February 2016 - 02:23 PM.

[Dawnstealer]

Tvrdoglavi, on 29 February 2016 - 12:02 PM, said:

I like what Elite Dangerous does to cheaters. They call it a stealth ban. The send the cheaters to a spearate instance of the game without other players wihout any notification.
MWO could send them to a separate instance with other cheaters. I wonder how long it would take for them to figure it out.

"These guys are REALLY good at headsh...heeeeeyyyyy..."

As for the single mechpacks, yeah - it's not a bargain, but I have the disposable income, the models are beautiful, and I want this game to keep going. So I throw my money at them.

[Rogue Jedi]

Odanan, on 28 February 2016 - 05:31 AM, said:

Light mechs, when well played, are the most durable class. If you let an assault mech to do a good shot on you, you deserve to die.

if you know how to pilot a light then yes Lights can be hard to hit giving them the illusion of durability, but if you make a mistake you are dead, if you come up against a good shot you are dead because they cannot take a hit.

Lights are my favorite weight class, and Spiders are my favorite Mech but I do not get great damage in them, and feel a bit guilty taking them since the ECM range reduction on the 5D (I can no longer protect the team), I rarely use my absolute favorite Mech in the game the SDR-5V because of its limited damage potential, but in that I can make it dance in such a way that I can keep 4 Mechs distracted for 2-3 minutes of continuous hit and runs on a city map.

Quote

Agreed. Rewards for scouting, spotting and capturing should be greater.

That's... too complex and convoluted to implement. If you get proper rewards for doing a light mech's job, you wouldn't need any multiplier for the damage.

I know what I suggested was probably unworkable but as PGI will not fairly reward the "light Mech" roles like scout, spotting, capturing, distraction, and harassing, as well as providing ECM cover reward. something like that seems to be the only real option to get Lights played more, with the ECM range reduction I largely stopped playing Spiders, I could only justify the 5D as contributing as an ECM shield, now when I want to play Light I usualy go for the FS9-E or JR7-IIC(O) so I can contribute meaningful amounts of damage ^{(usualy 300-600 as opposed to 150-300 in a Spider)}.

Finally there will be something for someone who takes one for the team and uses the umbrella Kit Fox ^{(I am fine doing that in group queue but never use it in solo)}, with the new AMS rewards, if the reward looks good enough ^{(highly unlikely but you never know)} the savvy light pilot may start sacrificing 1 ton for AMS and ammo