84 replies to this topic

[invernomuto]

Alistair Winter, on 22 June 2016 - 04:41 AM, said:

2 steps forward, 3 steps back?

This time, it's more like 9 steps forward, 1 step back, and everyone is focusing on the 1 step back. There's a lot of positive stuff going on this summer. All the players who don't see it, all the players who are threatening to leave the game...

Good. Bye bye now. I guess this isn't the game for you.

Yes and no. I agree with you for the part that the patch is 9 steps forward and 1 step back. But people IMHO have every right to complain. The minimap in the current state should have not passed the QC. They have a test server, why they do not use it? Again, for me it's not an issue to wait for the hotfix and I am satisfied by the patch, but I can understand if people are pissed off.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

invernomuto, on 22 June 2016 - 04:31 AM, said:

2) they changed the minimap because people, here, wanted some sort of information warfare. If you have a minimap that display only a small portion of the battlefield and gives to you all the relevant informations about the enemy (like distance and direction), information warfare won't be effective. I agree with you that there are issues with the current minimap, but they changed (ok, broken) it for some - interesting - reasons. Let's see how things will develop before complaining.

Only this is a bad approach to InfoWarfare. IW should be enhanced by varying sensor ranges, more counters to the existing info gathering equipment etc. etc.
For example, currently seismic sensor and radar derp are too strong. Basically must haves. To curb them and improve IW, they should be weakened directly or indirectly. For more detailed example, Seismic should have a counter module - a seismic jammer, that would make a mech invisible to seismic sensors (but if you carry it you can't have seismic yourself and the jamming doesn't work if you have an ECM in jam mode). As for radar derp, it should be broken down into two modules, one shortening enemy locks and one providing info whether you are locked by the enemy or not. That is a proper way of reducing the easyness of gathering info on the enemy, the illegible minimap is not.

[CygnusX7]

Alistair Winter, on 22 June 2016 - 04:41 AM, said:

2 steps forward, 3 steps back?

This time, it's more like 9 steps forward, 1 step back, and everyone is focusing on the 1 step back. There's a lot of positive stuff going on this summer. All the players who don't see it, all the players who are threatening to leave the game...

Good. Bye bye now. I guess this isn't the game for you.


I agree. Awesome sig tho. Who made it, what inspired it? Looks wonderfully 80's, but I don't recognise it.

nascar.com
and of course grumpy cat.

[Alistair Winter]

invernomuto, on 22 June 2016 - 04:53 AM, said:

Yes and no. I agree with you for the part that the patch is 9 steps forward and 1 step back. But people IMHO have every right to complain. The minimap in the current state should have not passed the QC. They have a test server, why they do not use it? Again, for me it's not an issue to wait for the hotfix and I am satisfied by the patch, but I can understand if people are pissed off.

Of course they have a right to complain. Well, some of the complaints were so excessive that I don't consider it within a customer's right at all. But 99% of the complaints were ok.

The problem is when people ask PGI to do 10 different things (hypothetical example) and then PGI gives us 9 of these things after we've waited years to see them, but completely fumbles the 10th thing. And then everyone loses their mind and says this is the worst thing that has ever happened in the history of computer games.

We're finally getting so many of the key features that people have been asking for since 2012. The four pillars, most players have probably forgotten about them, or maybe joined the game so late they never heard of the four pillars. And now people are still complaining about a feature that was released too early and will get hotfixed within a single week. It's ridiculous.

[Jetfire]

I would call this 3 steps forward and a minor hiccup that is getting hotfixed.

[Claxton Weathers]

I am not the only one to have this point of view, I have spent a lot of money on this game, and I have a right to my own ******* opinion. I am pissed off along with many others. Sure the mini map can be fixed, but it should have never been released. And for those people who say "Well leave then, buh bye" are the childish basturds. That mentality of If its fine for me it should be for everyone else might have worked in the 15th century but doesn't today. There isn't huge influxes of new people coming in, and the people we have here already should be more tight knit that it is. Heres another point I would like to bring up, Pissed off people get things done\changed. PGI wouldn't be so quick to fix it if only a few people bitched about it... right or wrong? And thats not the only problem here, Wait till you mf'er try to mechdeath my locust or the sudden stop glich, which is annoying as ****, has anyone had problem?

[invernomuto]

Prof RJ Gumby, on 22 June 2016 - 04:58 AM, said:

Only this is a bad approach to InfoWarfare. IW should be enhanced by varying sensor ranges, more counters to the existing info gathering equipment etc. etc.
For example, currently seismic sensor and radar derp are too strong. Basically must haves. To curb them and improve IW, they should be weakened directly or indirectly. For more detailed example, Seismic should have a counter module - a seismic jammer, that would make a mech invisible to seismic sensors (but if you carry it you can't have seismic yourself and the jamming doesn't work if you have an ECM in jam mode). As for radar derp, it should be broken down into two modules, one shortening enemy locks and one providing info whether you are locked by the enemy or not. That is a proper way of reducing the easyness of gathering info on the enemy, the illegible minimap is not.

I agree with your suggestions about IW for the most part. But, again, IW it's not limited to convoying information on minimap, PGI seems to have bigger plan (at least they're thinking on it).

Quote

Beyond that, future patches will see additional refinements to InfoTech mechanics and how they can relate to the Mini Map. Certain ‘Mechs with specific capacities, such as the Atlas D-DC and its Command Console, will be able to convey their own Enemy ‘Mech Orientation Intel. In addition, allied ‘Mechs within range of the D-DC will be able inherit the properties of its Command Console and convey their own Enemy ‘Mech Orientation Intel to their teammates. Mechanics such as those are still in the design phase, but hopefully that sheds some light on the direction we are looking to take the Mini Map and its relation to InfoTech in the future.

So we COULD have, in the futures, command mech with specific "Information Gathering" roles.

My impression is that the current "instant sharing" of all the enemy informations between ALL allied mechs (with just pressing "R" key), regardless of the distance, will be heavily changed sometime in the future. You could share target information only if you're near the targeting mech and acquire full infos only if you're near mech that have specific equipment. Maybe you could also be jammed, etc. AND you could rely on info passed on the minimap by the command wheel.

Alistair Winter, on 22 June 2016 - 05:05 AM, said:

We're finally getting so many of the key features that people have been asking for since 2012. The four pillars, most players have probably forgotten about them, or maybe joined the game so late they never heard of the four pillars.

What are these four pillars?

Edited by invernomuto, 22 June 2016 - 05:20 AM.

[Prof RJ Gumby]

Jetfire, on 22 June 2016 - 05:06 AM, said:

I would call this 3 steps forward and a minor hiccup that is getting hotfixed.

The question is, were the people not raging like crazy, would that hiccup get hotfixed? At the moment of implementation, PGI brass considered the minimap change a reasonable decision. So I don't think so, especially there were no change in this game that wasn't complained about by at least few people.

Ergo, we needed that ragestorm. It served its purpose.

[Battlemaster56]

Man chill it's just a minimap, don't have to panic of every little change you may have the right to show your opinion but sounding like a self center child who can't have his/her candy back is not the way to go.

[Claxton Weathers]

Why is everyone telling me to chill, i'm cool as a cucumber *******. Expressing my distaste for stupid ****....

[JC Daxion]

Alistair Winter, on 22 June 2016 - 04:41 AM, said:

2 steps forward, 3 steps back?

This time, it's more like 9 steps forward, 1 step back, and everyone is focusing on the 1 step back. There's a lot of positive stuff going on this summer. All the players who don't see it, all the players who are threatening to leave the game...

Good. Bye bye now. I guess this isn't the game for you.

Yea No kidding, could not of said it better myself.. People are all just hurt over, "there favorite mech" syndrome.. And yea Mini Map


But honestly, the mini-map is Far better than it was, It just needed a couple features added to it.. And honestly with all these people saying they were boycotting and not going to play untill it is fixed.. I dunno if it was just a coincidence, or not, But i had a blast playing all night. Everyone was loving the new frozen, and with the mini map not zoomed in, i found people communicating their locations, and enemies far more.

Over all last night was the most fun i have had in months.. But i know a big part of that was the excellent map update.

[SnagaDance]

MeiSooHaityu, on 22 June 2016 - 04:26 AM, said:

I'll say this though, I'm playing the first Shadow Run game now and it seems pretty solid and fun.

If you like the first one, the second (Dragonfall) and third (Hong Kong) are even better, you really see them putting the lessons they learned from the first game into practice.

[MeiSooHaityu]

SnagaDance, on 22 June 2016 - 06:08 AM, said:

If you like the first one, the second (Dragonfall) and third (Hong Kong) are even better, you really see them putting the lessons they learned from the first game into practice.

I've heard that too.

I actually have all of them, but I am still on the first one.

[Morggo]

Definitely agree with JC. Me and the lance hopped on and had more fun than our usual Friday drop night.
Heck, fully basic'd a Phawk and half way through a second in a couple hours, matches were running great and oddly, people were really quite civil and easy going which is a rare occurrence.

Oh, and Dat new Frozen! Spent half an hour in a Locust just exploring it, love all the new features, nooks, and hidey spots. The new bridges are great for LRM shelter, and plenty of places to fight with the size increase. This is one of their better re-builds of a map. Now, if they'll just do something about the darn caldera on Terra Therma to push the fight away from it.....

[Duncan Aravain]

JC Daxion, on 22 June 2016 - 05:54 AM, said:

But honestly, the mini-map is Far better than it was,

Sir, you must stop drinking the Kool-Ade.
The POTENTIAL mini map is far better than it was; this version was a piece of poor programming and lack of quality control and playtesting by PGI. The amount of dissent was valid, just not the vitriol.

[Baba Yogi]

Alistair Winter, on 22 June 2016 - 04:41 AM, said:

2 steps forward, 3 steps back?

This time, it's more like 9 steps forward, 1 step back, and everyone is focusing on the 1 step back. There's a lot of positive stuff going on this summer. All the players who don't see it, all the players who are threatening to leave the game...

Good. Bye bye now. I guess this isn't the game for you.


I agree. Awesome sig tho. Who made it, what inspired it? Looks wonderfully 80's, but I don't recognise it.

im curious though what are those 9 steps? Game hasnt improved a bit, we still have a skeletal content and this is added over 4 years. Also oddly enough when i watch matches from 2012 somehow fighting feels better. PGI's problem was and is, that they have no vision. Its the obvious from lack of progress over the years. I mean think about it, what does this game have aside from battletech lore which PGI added nothing to,(never even attempted at story telling) and alex's artwork. When you look at things like that you'll see it more clearly.

[Alistair Winter]

Lordhammer, on 22 June 2016 - 06:19 AM, said:

im curious though what are those 9 steps? Game hasnt improved a bit, we still have a skeletal content and this is added over 4 years. Also oddly enough when i watch matches from 2012 somehow fighting feels better. PGI's problem was and is, that they have no vision. Its the obvious from lack of progress over the years. I mean think about it, what does this game have aside from battletech lore which PGI added nothing to,(never even attempted at story telling) and alex's artwork. When you look at things like that you'll see it more clearly.

I think I explain my view here.

http://mwomercs.com/...e-four-pillars/

[JC Daxion]

Duncan Aravain, on 22 June 2016 - 06:12 AM, said:

Sir, you must stop drinking the Kool-Ade.
The POTENTIAL mini map is far better than it was; this version was a piece of poor programming and lack of quality control and playtesting by PGI. The amount of dissent was valid, just not the vitriol.

Dude it is missing a Zoom feature, and the directional arrows.. Showing you mech size, better flags for locations, better terrain markers.. ext...


and seriously, what is wrong with getting constructive feed back and then making changes.. this game has proven time and time again putting things on test people don't test outside of a few folks.. go live with a change and be ready with a few hot fixes.. I can deal with that any day of the week..



I personally Liked the LOCKED view better.. (not zoom level, but non-spinning map..) But if you don't like it, that doesn't make me wrong..


I'm really curious what you call poor programming? It all worked, and got community feedback... But again this community at least on the general forums can't even be civil about that. But i guess the internet awards people for acting like children.. and spamming forums with the same thread..

the exact same outcome could of come from a single tread and a simple pole... I guess that is to much to ask

[Dawnstealer]

Even the minimap wasn't horrible, just drastic. Maybe too drastic for a community as dramatic as this one.

Russ said that it was just a first pass and that more functionality was going to be added over time (like zooming, which...I mean, come on PGI: don't release it until that piece is done). After roughly...I don't know 20-30 drops yesterday grinding my PXHs, I was used to it.

Brandarr Gunnarson, on 22 June 2016 - 04:02 AM, said:

Same. Overall good; one glaring issue that overshadows it.

I even like that the minimap is static and we turn on it. That allows us to direct people north, south, east and west much easier. But the zoom ruins it and that's all people focus on.

It does take out the guy that says "THE ENEMY IS OVER TO OUR LEFT." Yeah...YOUR left, my back. Or right.

[cazidin]

Honestly, I didn't even mind the new mini map. I'd adapt overtime, though it was initially disorienting. Overall this is a good patch.