14 replies to this topic

[Xavori]

So all my matches this morning have come down to which team has players who lock targets. It's actually an even better indicator of success than VOIP use which is still pretty solid as a tool.

You can see it happen pretty early on in a match. One team will have a guy pop out and suddenly get buried one 3-4 streams of incoming LRM's and/or having the entire enemy team pile on to them. Either way works pretty well. Conversely, the other team will have a bunch of guys just spitting out blue lasers before ducking behind a wall, never having bothered to give the slightest indication to their teammates that there is something to shoot at. I even had one match where a teammate was outright hostile to the idea of locking targets because he didn't want lurmnoobs stealing his kills (in a totally surprising turn of events, he was one of the people I was talking about getting buried by the enemy).

So, PGI needs to fix this. We need to totally take away the R key from everyone. No more locking on targets. From now on, the only way you can tell if there are enemies around is if you see them for yourself.

[Wintersdark]

Another excellent posted stuff full of truths and heavily seasoned with lol. 9/10, would read again.

[Barantor]

It's almost like they should add some incentive for the individual to target lock something, like it affects how well you hit your enemy...... oh wait, no can't have that.....

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Barantor, on 22 March 2016 - 11:17 AM, said:

It's almost like they should add some incentive for the individual to target lock something, like it affects how well you hit your enemy...... oh wait, no can't have that.....

well... they could take away radar derp's chirping when you get targeted....

[Xavori]

Barantor, on 22 March 2016 - 11:17 AM, said:

It's almost like they should add some incentive for the individual to target lock something, like it affects how well you hit your enemy...... oh wait, no can't have that.....

Actually, if you want my serious opinion, target locking needs to get dumped from the game as it's a ridiculous kludge of a system. If a player can see an enemy, that information should be broadcast automatically to all his/her teammates. It's one of the many things that tabletop gets much better than MWO.

[Aetes Nakatomi]

Surely you mean 'R key... Has it gone too far?'

[Barantor]

Xavori, on 22 March 2016 - 11:30 AM, said:

Actually, if you want my serious opinion, target locking needs to get dumped from the game as it's a ridiculous kludge of a system. If a player can see an enemy, that information should be broadcast automatically to all his/her teammates. It's one of the many things that tabletop gets much better than MWO.

Targeting in Mechwarrior games always seemed like just a way to emulate this....

http://www.sarna.net...C3_Command_Unit

If we had real info wars with c3 modules you had to equip to gain targeting data and if that targeting data affected how much damage or critical chance you could have.... then... and just only maybe then... we would have a reason for 'recon' and such beyond vainly hurling LRMs at targets lol.

I dunno though, I like a lot more depth and complexity in my games and that doesn't seem to be a thing in western games much more... hell they even dumbed down fallout some.

[Xavori]

Barantor, on 22 March 2016 - 11:39 AM, said:

Targeting in Mechwarrior games always seemed like just a way to emulate this....

http://www.sarna.net...C3_Command_Unit

If we had real info wars with c3 modules you had to equip to gain targeting data and if that targeting data affected how much damage or critical chance you could have.... then... and just only maybe then... we would have a reason for 'recon' and such beyond vainly hurling LRMs at targets lol.

I dunno though, I like a lot more depth and complexity in my games and that doesn't seem to be a thing in western games much more... hell they even dumbed down fallout some.

There's a difference between complexity in game play, and complexity in the user interface. Just making it more complicated for users to do what they want to do doesn't make a game more fun or interesting. It just makes it more annoying.

[Screech]

Ahh the ole "Doesn't-press-R-boogeyman" post. It has been a bit, nice to see it didn't leave town.

[Revis Volek]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 22 March 2016 - 11:28 AM, said:

well... they could take away radar derp's chirping when you get targeted....

I chirp without radar derp?

Xavori, on 22 March 2016 - 11:44 AM, said:

There's a difference between complexity in game play, and complexity in the user interface. Just making it more complicated for users to do what they want to do doesn't make a game more fun or interesting. It just makes it more annoying.

Doesnt have to make sense to be fun, but does have to make sense to be understood.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

Revis Volek, on 22 March 2016 - 01:21 PM, said:

I chirp without radar derp?

Hmm... maybe they changed it? I haven't run a mech without radar derp in years. (Which frankly says a lot about that module)

[Metus regem]

Xavori, on 22 March 2016 - 10:11 AM, said:

So all my matches this morning have come down to which team has players who lock targets. It's actually an even better indicator of success than VOIP use which is still pretty solid as a tool.

You can see it happen pretty early on in a match. One team will have a guy pop out and suddenly get buried one 3-4 streams of incoming LRM's and/or having the entire enemy team pile on to them. Either way works pretty well. Conversely, the other team will have a bunch of guys just spitting out blue lasers before ducking behind a wall, never having bothered to give the slightest indication to their teammates that there is something to shoot at. I even had one match where a teammate was outright hostile to the idea of locking targets because he didn't want lurmnoobs stealing his kills (in a totally surprising turn of events, he was one of the people I was talking about getting buried by the enemy).

So, PGI needs to fix this. We need to totally take away the R key from everyone. No more locking on targets. From now on, the only way you can tell if there are enemies around is if you see them for yourself.

[Barantor]

Xavori, on 22 March 2016 - 11:44 AM, said:

There's a difference between complexity in game play, and complexity in the user interface. Just making it more complicated for users to do what they want to do doesn't make a game more fun or interesting. It just makes it more annoying.

If you want a shoot-em-up though, there are other games that arguably do it better already?

Mechwarrior has always been complex, it's part of the draw beyond the big stompy robots. Commanding a lance via those F keys in 4 wasn't exactly easy either.

Of course it is all opinion on if it is fun or annoying. Mechwarrior as a title is going to stay niche though and it is better to embrace everything that entails, complex or not.

There aren't 3 billion mechwarriors waiting around the bend if they change a bunch of things, I'd rather them cater to the folks that have kept the title afloat for decades than 'appeal to the masses'.

Again though, it is all opinion. Mine is to make this game complex and meaningful through systems that other shooters don't have and fit within the confines of the setting.

[Wintersdark]

Xavori, on 22 March 2016 - 11:44 AM, said:

There's a difference between complexity in game play, and complexity in the user interface. Just making it more complicated for users to do what they want to do doesn't make a game more fun or interesting. It just makes it more annoying.

While I'm against a needlessly complex user interface, limited electronics is part of battletech. In Battletech, to share targeting information required actual equipment that took tonnage and slots. Battlemechs are a wierd cross section of high tech and primitive, and that's part of the appeal of the whole setting.

I wouldn't want to see automatic target data sharing unless you had a C3 module - something you'd actually pay in tonnage for.

I would go so far as to say:

I'd like to see targeting be required to get weapon convergence period. Weapons converge at target range, not crosshair distance. That way, there's a need to get targeting for the user, instead of just to help the team. Further, it would actually be advantageous for the user as currently convergence can make a narrow fast mech literally impossible to hit with ballistics/ppc's.

---

The above happens because if you need to lead the target a little, as you move the cross hairs in front of it, the moment the cross hairs are off the mech, your weapons converge on the new distance to terrain/skybox(spreading much wider, moving your lead arm too far forward and your rear arm behind), and that arm movement can make it actually completely impossible to hit your target.

---

Limited electronics support is an essential aspect of Battletech, and is required for the mechs that do have that equipment to have any value.

[cazidin]

While we're at it, PGI should nerf the X key. Mechs should be slow, unyieldly and otherwise unable to stop on a dime.