94 replies to this topic

[MacClearly]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 05 February 2017 - 07:22 PM, said:

No... it is saying that there is more to combat than JUST doing damage, but then you are very skewed in your viewpoint of the game because it is what you have been taught. Trying to shoehorn it into only one way of being rewarded steals the true depth that this game has to offer... it has not survived for decades because it is a one dimensional FPS, even if that is all PGI wants it to be which is sad for all of us.

You might want it to be another game, but it isn't.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MacClearly, on 05 February 2017 - 07:33 PM, said:

You might want it to be another game, but it isn't.

No... it is a game where the Moral Hazard you are promoting as skewed the behavior incentives which dictate Game Theory into what you have been erroneously taught is reality. It is not reality but an artificially warped version of what it should be... so I want it to be the actual game it should be but PGI has mangled player behavior by their $hitty reward system that pigeonholes everyone into just one way of being rewarded in play.

[NighthawK1337]

My Nova and Kitfox approves.

But like Restos said, it's been a long time coming and there's still no news and no changes about it.

[MacClearly]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 05 February 2017 - 08:22 PM, said:

No... it is a game where the Moral Hazard you are promoting as skewed the behavior incentives which dictate Game Theory into what you have been erroneously taught is reality. It is not reality but an artificially warped version of what it should be... so I want it to be the actual game it should be but PGI has mangled player behavior by their $hitty reward system that pigeonholes everyone into just one way of being rewarded in play.

Moral Hazard? Urgg Zuul...

What I am not promoting is ideas or changes that wouldn't be good for the game we have not debating if it would be a better game if it were true to BT.

The only artificially warped reality is here is the inability to accept what this game is. You want the game how you think it should be. That doesn't make what you think correct, it is just your preference.

Like it or not we have a team based arena shooter. They have used BT IP in doing so, but do to its design it would not be even close to a good idea to make equipping ams pay out because it would be exploitable and not promote the game play as designed.

Maybe the Harebrained Schemes RTS will quench your thirst for the vision of what you think a Battletech game should be. Until then if you are going to be sticking around to play MWO, you can fully expect it to continue to disappoint you because it is a completely different animal.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MacClearly, on 05 February 2017 - 09:50 PM, said:

Moral Hazard? Urgg Zuul...

What I am not promoting is ideas or changes that wouldn't be good for the game we have not debating if it would be a better game if it were true to BT.

The only artificially warped reality is here is the inability to accept what this game is. You want the game how you think it should be. That doesn't make what you think correct, it is just your preference.

Like it or not we have a team based arena shooter. They have used BT IP in doing so, but do to its design it would not be even close to a good idea to make equipping ams pay out because it would be exploitable and not promote the game play as designed.

Maybe the Harebrained Schemes RTS will quench your thirst for the vision of what you think a Battletech game should be. Until then if you are going to be sticking around to play MWO, you can fully expect it to continue to disappoint you because it is a completely different animal.

So... like normal instead of just admitting that you are ignorant about the things I am talking about, you continue to speak from your position of ignorance. It is sad that you see this warped version of what the game could be and are not only happy about it but fervently defend it because you do not know any better. Game Theory, Macro Economics, and a few other fields of study would all provide you information that you lack to be making an informed opinion about this stuff... it is only an arena shooter as you describe in its totality because all other things are punished by not being rewarded properly. But then the Housing Market crash of '08 was apparently a mystery to 99.9999% of the population as well... even though that was clearly a warped market state caused by Moral Hazards to anyone with a lick of sense and a small amount of learning. So I guess I should not be that surprised that people are lost about something as trivial as a video game I play for fun when it was the exact same variables that almost crashed the entire world economy over peoples inability to recognize.

Edit: I know how you like to say that "you could use Google to learn the terms I am using"... so instead of just saying that you can, why dont you just do it? I make it very easy since I use Capital letters denoting them as proper nouns for the specific term.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 05 February 2017 - 11:37 PM.

[MacClearly]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 05 February 2017 - 11:34 PM, said:

So... like normal instead of just admitting that you are ignorant about the things I am talking about, you continue to speak from your position of ignorance. It is sad that you see this warped version of what the game could be and are not only happy about it but fervently defend it because you do not know any better. Game Theory, Macro Economics, and a few other fields of study would all provide you information that you lack to be making an informed opinion about this stuff... it is only an arena shooter as you describe in its totality because all other things are punished by not being rewarded properly. But then the Housing Market crash of '08 was apparently a mystery to 99.9999% of the population as well... even though that was clearly a warped market state caused by Moral Hazards to anyone with a lick of sense and a small amount of learning. So I guess I should not be that surprised that people are lost about something as trivial as a video game I play for fun when it was the exact same variables that almost crashed the entire world economy over peoples inability to recognize.

Edit: I know how you like to say that "you could use Google to learn the terms I am using"... so instead of just saying that you can, why dont you just do it? I make it very easy since I use Capital letters denoting them as proper nouns for the specific term.

I don't need google. You are going on about what should be and could be. I am saying accept what it is.

You somehow think it is clever to bring up a bunch of irrelevant terminolgy because somehow you think that makes you sound smart. Like I have already said it makes you sound really insecure and it is what led me to hazzard a guess before about your level of education. So you can continue if by going off topic makes you think you are somehow showing me up but believe me I am not worried about what you think. Guess you really are stuck in the 'big picture' dreamscape, when you bring up macro economics into the conversation. Thank you for the laugh though.

Edit: Clearly you haven't looked up non sequitur...

Edited by MacClearly, 06 February 2017 - 12:01 AM.

[RestosIII]

'decides to finally check up on this thread again'

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MacClearly, on 05 February 2017 - 11:46 PM, said:

I don't need google. You are going on about what should be and could be. I am saying accept what it is.

You somehow think it is clever to bring up a bunch of irrelevant terminolgy because somehow you think that makes you sound smart. Like I have already established you are an uneducated and insecure fella that way.

Edit: Clearly you haven't looked up non sequitur...

meh... my fault really, I know that talking with you is the equivalent of playing chess with a pigeon. You knock over the pieces, $hit on the board, and then strut around like you won... which I will concede you probably did, since you are no more intelligent or informed then when we started. A lot of things can fixed in this world but willful ignorance is not one of them.

[MacClearly]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 05 February 2017 - 11:56 PM, said:

meh... my fault really, I know that talking with you is the equivalent of playing chess with a pigeon. You knock over the pieces, $hit on the board, and then strut around like you won... which I will concede you probably did, since you are no more intelligent or informed then when we started. A lot of things can fixed in this world but willful ignorance is not one of them.

Well that is an attack on my intelligence...coming from you.

So I guess you win because Game Theory and Macro Economics, sounds incredibly applicable to the lack of rewards for using ams in Mechwarrior Online.

Must suck thinking yourself so superior but not being able to convince others of your genius or have anything to show for it.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

MacClearly, on 06 February 2017 - 12:23 AM, said:

Well that is an attack on my intelligence...coming from you.

So I guess you win because Game Theory and Macro Economics, sounds incredibly applicable to the lack of rewards for using ams in Mechwarrior Online.

Must suck thinking yourself so superior but not being able to convince others of your genius or have anything to show for it.

Since it is easily accessible information that I did not conceive of... just information learned like anyone else could, how would that make me "superior"? Now in regards to your willful ignorance, of course I am superior to you... but that is again by your own choice not because of anything inherent in me that I can take credit for. I would much rather you not be willfully ignorant but that is my wish for all of humanity not just you specifically... sadly that one is not fulfilled either.

Edit: unsurprising you are ignorant of the definition of the word ignorant (sidenote: which is why it is my favorite word in the English language cause the irony can not be topped.) It is not an attack on your Intelligence but of your Knowledge, those are two separate classifications.

Edited by I_AM_ZUUL, 06 February 2017 - 01:14 AM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

MacClearly, on 05 February 2017 - 02:11 PM, said:

I think part of the problem here is that although you are helping your team a by strapping that gear to your mech in some ways, maybe even a big way in certain situations, you are handicapping your own firepower. Add to this standing or running along with assaults and heavies is not exactly skill intensive.

Would be kinda hard to have a reward for 'excellent standing around'. I know that sounds horrible but if they did it would be something that instead of adding use such as you are doing, might open it up for farming and exploitation. So it makes sense to have it in without making it a print money mode.

We already have ECM rewards. Those are effectively "standing around" rewards.

And what about spotting assists? Those are basically "Look in the general direction of a guy and push R" rewards.

Edit: Almost forgot capping. Those are the standing around rewards too.

Edited by Kaeb Odellas, 06 February 2017 - 01:39 AM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Also, another stupid thing:

Why does PGI count a second AMS hardpoint as equal to a real weapon hardpoint? The AS7-K is the worst Atlas variant, and has been since Closed Beta. Why hasn't this been addressed?

Edited by Kaeb Odellas, 06 February 2017 - 01:48 AM.

[I_AM_ZUUL]

Kaeb Odellas, on 06 February 2017 - 01:37 AM, said:

We already have ECM rewards. Those are effectively "standing around" rewards.

And what about spotting assists? Those are basically "Look in the general direction of a guy and push R" rewards.

Edit: Almost forgot capping. Those are the standing around rewards too.

dude... do not try to use Facts or Logic with that guy, it is ONLY a FPS and if you are not running the most meta PPFLD mechs then you have utterly failed to play this game according to him.

[Napoleon_Blownapart]

i would kill for a module or skill that makes AMS self only

Edited by Gorantir, 06 February 2017 - 06:27 AM.

[GrimRiver]

RestosIII, on 05 February 2017 - 11:53 PM, said:

'decides to finally check up on this thread again'

All because I said I wanted to do away with damage oriented c-bill earning and replace it with team actions instead.

FPS game this is, yes.
FPS this is ONLY, no.

There is literally no reason to support the team with AMS when it takes up room for more weapons in a game where 80-90% c-bills are earned by damage and kills other than self satisfaction of helping the team.

Damage earned c-bills don't have to be cut out entirely, just make team actions earn more.

[Jazzbandit1313]

Why not go all out and apply a 1.1x modifier to round cert earnings for bringing one ams. two means 1.2, three 1.3.

All the Cbills.

[MacClearly]

I_AM_ZUUL, on 06 February 2017 - 12:53 AM, said:

Since it is easily accessible information that I did not conceive of... just information learned like anyone else could, how would that make me "superior"? Now in regards to your willful ignorance, of course I am superior to you... but that is again by your own choice not because of anything inherent in me that I can take credit for. I would much rather you not be willfully ignorant but that is my wish for all of humanity not just you specifically... sadly that one is not fulfilled either.

Edit: unsurprising you are ignorant of the definition of the word ignorant (sidenote: which is why it is my favorite word in the English language cause the irony can not be topped.) It is not an attack on your Intelligence but of your Knowledge, those are two separate classifications.

However you want to put it you have gone off topic and somehow think spamming jargon makes you sound knowledgable. Too bad this is what you come up with when you are incapable of presenting an argument about what is being discussed.

[MacClearly]

Kaeb Odellas, on 06 February 2017 - 01:37 AM, said:

We already have ECM rewards. Those are effectively "standing around" rewards.

And what about spotting assists? Those are basically "Look in the general direction of a guy and push R" rewards.

Edit: Almost forgot capping. Those are the standing around rewards too.

Capping is holding a position. Could be standing around but it also holds significant strategy in getting there and winning the game.

To target an enemy you have to have found him.

You're right, any ecm rewards should be removed.

[Bazni]

Fun thread. Zuul's got a point - damage isn't everything in this game's combat. This is shown by the meta hatred of lrm's due to their spread as well as the fact that there are components on a mech. Also the fact that there is rear and front armor on the torsos. If damage were everything, there would be none of these. Placement of that damage has a purpose, and getting a kill is usually preferable to dealing more damage (hence the tendency to want to shoot a mech in the back). Personal kills aren't necessarily everything either, since nominally the game is about the team winning and not personal achievement. It ought to be first and foremost about accomplishing the goals of the play mode, but most players (me included) like to shoot the other team first and foremost. It's a team game too, though, so you should also want your teammates to do well.

Re AMS (and ECM, although there is already a determined answer), the question is whether to reward preventing damage to your team as well as directly enabling damage by your team (tag, target locks, etc.). Preventing damage to your team definitely aids in winning the match since that lets your teammates do more, be it damage, kills, or work on the objectives.

Damage shouldn't be rewarded as much, and victory should be rewarded more. No one likes the cap race because it's boring and unrewarding. Unfortunately, greater rewards for capping would probably also create a toxic environment with pickup play where there will be a need for a "goalie" which no one will want to play without incentive and which will then devolve into just blaming the last players to leave the flag unprotected. It's a conundrum for assault mode especially.

So: if it's a team game, victory needs greater rewards. If it's not, survival needs greater rewards (post-match economy!).

TL;DR: read the underlines.

[Baulven]

Let's face it LRMs need a buff (and fixed mechanics because missiles that act like HIMARS and only go 1000m is stupid) and AMS needs a bonus.

The reason I say AMS needs a bonus is because when things like NARC get put into play you better believe you are praying for an ECM mech, an AMS machine or hard cover. Preventing and minimizing casualties is huge for long term play and strategies (not that this game has those aspects, but it could get it over time.)