776 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

mogs01gt, on 06 October 2016 - 07:46 PM, said:

Why are you on this stationary kick? That has nothing to do with volume and depth. Mech are simply spinning/turning on a flat 2D plain. Each component that is getting hit is a flat piece of designated object code on the mech.

which part of "leave me the **** out of this" is really so hard to comprehend?

[Mcgral18]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 October 2016 - 08:46 PM, said:

which part of "leave me the **** out of this" is really so hard to comprehend?

You can leave yourself out of it

[Dick Shipley]

Wolfhound still performs but I feel so very sad for my Ember. All lights need at least a little structure love these days. Exception being cheetahs, naturally. They're basically half the size of IS lights of same tonnage.

[Dick Shipley]

Also poor Zeus. I'm pretty sure everybody and they're cousin knows to shoot the thing in the left torso. It need either a right torso hardpoint heavy variant or its or original size back. It's relatively small size and good structure quirks are what made it at least a fun assault, if not the most effective

[VorpalAnvil]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 October 2016 - 04:51 PM, said:

Or maybe I'm the only MFer around here who actually flanks and backstabs people?

You play MWO? Since when?

[mogs01gt]

Bishop Steiner, on 06 October 2016 - 08:46 PM, said:

which part of "leave me the **** out of this" is really so hard to comprehend?

LMAO your reasoning is found to be flawed and then you cry when people point it out......wow.

[L3mming2]

Deathlike, on 06 October 2016 - 05:01 PM, said:

As far PPFLD is concerned... at the time of impact, whatever "2D state" the mech is in, is what gets hit. Outside of missiles (and arty+airstrikes), you don't worry about any sort of AOE component (hitting multiple sections) of the mech.




Everyone's always trying to attack from a different location. That's normal. The thing is, most combat around here still happens like that. I suggest you really record your games... because you will find that most engagements will still end up being a frontal fight... even if the initial engagement is a flank.




I'm just talking about dealing damage. There's still too many people that stare despite having dealt their payload.



I see enough of both, but it is what it is.

you say the 2D front profile is so inportant. but i dont think thats thru, its not hard to hit a heavy mech in this game. the goal is not to hit the mech but to hit a specific conponent for example the CT. the ebony jag has a small front 2D profile but it still is a glass canon cos it cant shield its CT. a humanoid mech with in comparison a huge front 2D profile is way more tanky simply because it can shield its CT ore a damaged ST..

even with lights when you compare the jenner and the firestarter the jenner suffers from a easy to core out CT wile the fire starter has a way bigger front 2D profile..
(lights do need to be buffed do in general but thats a entirely different topic)

[mogs01gt]

**** Shipley, on 06 October 2016 - 10:10 PM, said:

Also poor Zeus. I'm pretty sure everybody and they're cousin knows to shoot the thing in the left torso. It need either a right torso hardpoint heavy variant or its or original size back. It's relatively small size and good structure quirks are what made it at least a fun assault, if not the most effective

The zeus is horrible to pilot unless you make it a long rang mech with LLs or LRMs. Brawling in it sucks!! People just pick a torso and shoot it off. I'd rather be in my Victor because at least I get an ac20!

Now if we had Melee,,,the Zeus would rek ppl!

Edited by mogs01gt, 11 October 2016 - 05:07 AM.

[VitriolicViolet]

The Zeus was good fun to pilot and i still do occasionally but yeah everyone knows where its weapons are and it takes less than a second to tell which arm to shoot at (the 'doom fist' or if its not there then naturally the other side).

I am hoping that if they pull a hero Zeus out that they flip the arms, put the missile fist on the left.

[LordKnightFandragon]

**** Shipley, on 06 October 2016 - 10:10 PM, said:

Also poor Zeus. I'm pretty sure everybody and they're cousin knows to shoot the thing in the left torso. It need either a right torso hardpoint heavy variant or its or original size back. It's relatively small size and good structure quirks are what made it at least a fun assault, if not the most effective

IDK Why PGI felt any mechs needed to get BIGGER. They are all HUGE. The Catapult and lights are the only properly sized mechs. Everything else might as well be Gypsy Danger...

[Y E O N N E]

LordKnightFandragon, on 11 October 2016 - 09:05 PM, said:

IDK Why PGI felt any mechs needed to get BIGGER. They are all HUGE. The Catapult and lights are the only properly sized mechs. Everything else might as well be Gypsy Danger...

Giving me ideas for a Black Knight paint scheme...

[Karl Streiger]

mogs01gt, on 11 October 2016 - 05:03 AM, said:

The zeus is horrible to pilot unless you make it a long rang mech with LLs or LRMs. Brawling in it sucks!! People just pick a torso and shoot it off. I'd rather be in my Victor because at least I get an ac20!

Now if we had Melee,,,the Zeus would rek ppl!

Well I would rather think that the rescale did not affected the ability of a Mech to brawl.
Look As7-S still a beast - same with my WubZeus, up close the hitbox just changed from huge to colossal = no chance.

You only realize the big boxes when trying to run med -long range build make things worse with weapons that needed a longer face time.

[Ryllen Kriel]

The Zeus really shouldn't of gotten a size increase, at 80 tonnes it was fine before the rescale. The Phoenix Hawk either needs ten more tonnes to match the Griffins, Wolverines and Shadow Hawks (which it is the same size as) or it should be shrunk to match the Cicadas and Blackjacks.

[Appogee]

I was expecting - and looking forward to - a "mathematic/scientific" approach being applied.

However, when Ross listed the criteria for the rescaling, I noticed with alarm an additional criteria that meant, in effect, "PGI will modify the modelled sizes based on PGI's judgement on balance requirements".

This immediately rendered the rest of the resizing irrelevant, from my perspective. It's just another version of "whatever PGI thinks is best" ... I just don't have any confidence in that, based on long experience.

Some of the eventual rescales prove that I was correct to be concerned.

Edited by Appogee, 12 October 2016 - 02:23 AM.

[Bud Crue]

Appogee, on 12 October 2016 - 02:21 AM, said:

I was expecting - and looking forward to - a "mathematic/scientific" approach being applied.

However, when Ross listed the criteria for the rescaling, I noticed with alarm an additional criteria that meant, in effect, "PGI will modify the modelled sizes based on PGI's judgement on balance requirements".

I actually just wish that they would use some of that "judgement".
White Knights often comment that PGI has data, that PGI uses that data to do: "things". I'm just not seeing that.

I don't have data. I have merely my empirical evidence of what I see in game, what I see in MRBC matches (yes sometimes I watch), what I hear and see is "meta" at the moment. All that, at least would seem to point to the fact that certain mechs are, well: crap to middling to OP or what have you, and something ought to be done to make things a bit more level in this supposedly "competitive game", where all mechs are asserted to have equivalent value according to the devs (cough).

Examples: I refuse to believe that the data shows that Victors are overplayed monsters that dominate the game. They must be according to "the data" though, otherwise please explain the devs refusal to fix it? 10 extra structure (as of the rescale) in the side torsos is not a fix for a mech that everyone KNOWS has massive and terrible hit boxes relative to its assault peers (for actual data see Tarogato's analysis of the various even leader boards over the last year linked below*). Speaking of its assault peers...does the data really show that the Zeus, even with its massive structure bonuses (5s), is oft dominating the assault class meta...or is even "competitive"? I don't think so. These are just a few examples of IS Assaults.

When you start looking across the board, there is clear standout crap mechs everywhere, which PGI's lack of action on suggests that "the data" must show as being OP in their eyes, yet in-game experience is utterly contrary for all of us actually playing them. I don't care if you fix/balance by quirks, rescale, remodel, adjust hit boxes, or whatever, but at least consider the actual data and then use some of that "judgment" you claim to have to help the obvious under performers.

* https://docs.google....t#gid=873915851

[Appogee]

Bud Crue, on 12 October 2016 - 03:05 AM, said:

I actually just wish that they would use some of that "judgement".
White Knights often comment that PGI has data, that PGI uses that data to do: "things". I'm just not seeing that.

I don't have data. I have merely my empirical evidence of what I see in game, what I see in MRBC matches (yes sometimes I watch), what I hear and see is "meta" at the moment. All that, at least would seem to point to the fact that certain mechs are, well: crap to middling to OP or what have you, and something ought to be done to make things a bit more level in this supposedly "competitive game", where all mechs are asserted to have equivalent value according to the devs (cough).

Examples: I refuse to believe that the data shows that Victors are overplayed monsters that dominate the game. They must be according to "the data" though, otherwise please explain the devs refusal to fix it? 10 extra structure (as of the rescale) in the side torsos is not a fix for a mech that everyone KNOWS has massive and terrible hit boxes relative to its assault peers (for actual data see Tarogato's analysis of the various even leader boards over the last year linked below*). Speaking of its assault peers...does the data really show that the Zeus, even with its massive structure bonuses (5s), is oft dominating the assault class meta...or is even "competitive"? I don't think so. These are just a few examples of IS Assaults.

When you start looking across the board, there is clear standout crap mechs everywhere, which PGI's lack of action on suggests that "the data" must show as being OP in their eyes, yet in-game experience is utterly contrary for all of us actually playing them. I don't care if you fix/balance by quirks, rescale, remodel, adjust hit boxes, or whatever, but at least consider the actual data and then use some of that "judgment" you claim to have to help the obvious under performers.

* https://docs.google....t#gid=873915851

I think they barely look at the data, and barely play play their own game.

They're a small shop, and the time they have, they spend on other* things**.











* Would you like to buy a Mech Pack?
** I'm pretty sure much of their resource is currently developing an alternative game in the background.

Edited by Appogee, 12 October 2016 - 05:03 AM.

[DrxAbstract]

Appogee, on 12 October 2016 - 02:21 AM, said:

I was expecting - and looking forward to - a "mathematic/scientific" approach being applied.

However, when Ross listed the criteria for the rescaling, I noticed with alarm an additional criteria that meant, in effect, "PGI will modify the modelled sizes based on PGI's judgement on balance requirements".

This immediately rendered the rest of the resizing irrelevant, from my perspective. It's just another version of "whatever PGI thinks is best" ... I just don't have any confidence in that, based on long experience.

Some of the eventual rescales prove that I was correct to be concerned.

Such as how the TBR has the volume of a 85 ton Mech when using the Missile Hardpoints of the Prime, (A) and (C) RT/LT Omnipods and a 100 tonner with the (S) and (D) RT/LT Omnipods? Or was that just an oversight...

Re-scaling the Mechs in uniform fashion is good and all, but PGI acts like the Mech scale is OK now because most Mechs are relative to one another. Yet PGI seems content to ignore, or is utterly oblivious to the fact, that the scaling did not have to culminate in an absolute size increase; Everything didnt have to get bigger to achieve a relative scale... But they did it that way, much to the detriment of our new 35 ton Mights™ and a few other chassis.

Scaling could do with an overall 10-15% decrease.

[mogs01gt]

Karl Streiger, on 11 October 2016 - 10:04 PM, said:

Well I would rather think that the rescale did not affected the ability of a Mech to brawl.
Look As7-S still a beast - same with my WubZeus, up close the hitbox just changed from huge to colossal = no chance.
You only realize the big boxes when trying to run med -long range build make things worse with weapons that needed a longer face time.

Pulse lasers in that WubZeuss?

[Jetfire]

I am very pleased with it, a few mechs like the victor could use a little quirk tweaking but that's about it.

[mogs01gt]

Jetfire, on 12 October 2016 - 04:33 AM, said:

I am very pleased with it, a few mechs like the victor could use a little quirk tweaking but that's about it.

You mean enough quirks to make it overpowered.... Yeah, that's great for balancing..