1125 replies to this topic

[The Lighthouse]

Still funding Harmony Gold lawsuit is too important to not spend money on this game.

It is quite disappointing that Dane's video was unfortunately largely ignored, but that's pretty much what was gonna happen.

[Johnathan Tanner]

The Lighthouse, on 11 May 2018 - 11:44 PM, said:

Still funding Harmony Gold lawsuit is too important to not spend money on this game.

It is quite disappointing that Dane's video was unfortunately largely ignored, but that's pretty much what was gonna happen.

What does HG actually want? For pgi to shutdown MWO?

[The Lighthouse]

Johnathan Tanner, on 11 May 2018 - 11:49 PM, said:

What does HG actually want? For pgi to shutdown MWO?

I doubt HG wants MWO to shutdown completely, at this point more like... trolling that making financial aspect of investing this particular IP really bad, which has been rather successful given how pitiful the output of Battletech has been.

They are also extra salty because Robotech is basically doomed unlike Battletech.

[Brain Cancer]

Johnathan Tanner, on 11 May 2018 - 11:49 PM, said:

What does HG actually want? For pgi to shutdown MWO?

Actually, they'd be happy if Battletech in general no longer made any kind of money, as a victory would shore up their IP rights massively and nothing works better than having an example you can point at for crossing your lawyers. Especially after the Hasbro suit debacle.

[Y E O N N E]

Nema Nabojiv, on 11 May 2018 - 11:32 PM, said:

This whole initiative with re-funning and community driven stuff ended up pretty well, hasn't it.

Ignored, stalled, and then PGI doing what they want to do anyway...

[Antares102]

Wow this is truely hilarious. The gravity of that statement is on Trump tweet levels.
Being good does not mean one knows balance...
No, quite the opposite Mr. Bullock. Being good means you have to sit down, analyse sh|t and self-reflect.
Without analysis and self-reflection you would have never become good in the focking first place.
And both actions are the basis to learn the imbalances and thus also knoow how to balance it.

Do we need to know more?
So much appreciation of the community in one tweet.

Edited by Antares102, 13 May 2018 - 03:27 AM.

[Thorqemada]

Afaiac in the whole hidstory of MWO no PTS has given birth to a good result ever!

So why bother?

Aside of that W/L and K/D have no correlation to understanding the game bcs being carried by a group and copying builds from Websites inflates Stats as well as the Mind but doesnt teach reason.

[Y E O N N E]

Antares102, on 13 May 2018 - 03:24 AM, said:

Wow this is truely hilarious. The gravity of that statement is on Trump tweet levels.
Being good does not mean one knows balance...
No, quite the opposite Mr. Bullock. Being good means you have to sit down, analyse sh|t and self-reflect.
Without analysis and self-reflection you would have never become good in the focking first place.
And both actions are the basis to learn the imbalances and thus also knoow how to balance it.

Do we need to know more?
So much appreciation of the community in one tweet.

Being good helps you understand the balance, but I can name two very good players who demonstrably do not know the first thing about balance.

[JediPanther]

The Lighthouse, on 11 May 2018 - 11:44 PM, said:

Still funding Harmony Gold lawsuit is too important to not spend money on this game.

It is quite disappointing that Dane's video was unfortunately largely ignored, but that's pretty much what was gonna happen.

I've not spend a dime on this game since the urban mech came out. I don't give a dam about 'funding' pgi's court battle no matter how much I hate HG. you can spend all the money you want. I've got bills to pay such as rent and food. it is a sad fact pgi basically told Dane and everyone else to f-off while giving us unobtainable criteria that must be met for pgi to even thing of making suggested changes yet crying on twitter to russ over some thing so lame as laser changes to clans causes russ to crap his pants and veto the laser changes before they were even made via the actual patch.

I'll gladly spend my money on this game when the devs and russ himself figures out this game is not and never will be an esport and they begin to make logical sound changes involving the community in a very much more active manner including use of the pts and their own god dam forum instead of crybabies-on-twitter-to-company-president. They have someone with the label of community manager too but what does that job mean? Nothing apparently here.

[Nema Nabojiv]

Antares102, on 13 May 2018 - 03:24 AM, said:

So, is he trying to tell us you can be bad and understand how balance works? Well that would mean lurms are indeed op, and so are the lights and heavy lasers, because literally every bad player thinks that they are.

[Mystere]

Antares102, on 13 May 2018 - 03:24 AM, said:

Wow this is truely hilarious. The gravity of that statement is on Trump tweet levels.
Being good does not mean one knows balance...
No, quite the opposite Mr. Bullock. Being good means you have to sit down, analyse sh|t and self-reflect.
Without analysis and self-reflection you would have never become good in the focking first place.
And both actions are the basis to learn the imbalances and thus also knoow how to balance it.

Do we need to know more?
So much appreciation of the community in one tweet.

Nema Nabojiv, on 13 May 2018 - 08:45 AM, said:

So, is he trying to tell us you can be bad and understand how balance works? Well that would mean lurms are indeed op, and so are the lights and heavy lasers, because literally every bad player thinks that they are.

I think you both missed his point.

Let me put it in another context that might help: How many MLB or NFL coaches are World Series or Superbowl champion players?

[FupDup]

Mystere, on 13 May 2018 - 09:43 AM, said:

I think you both missed his point.

Let me put it in another context that might help: How many MLB or NFL coaches are World Series or Superbowl champion players?

To provide another counter-point, just because somebody is good at something doesn't mean they have objective opinions. They are still just as vulnerable to personal bias and preferences as anybody below them.

A good example of this would be the game Overwatch, where a pretty sizeable chunk of the forum deliberately wants certain heroes to be objectively superior to all other choices (i.e. Genji, Tracer, etc.) because they have a higher skill floor than others. Or in MWO, some top players want PPCs to not just be a part of the meta but rather they want PPCs to be THE meta exclusively.

Observing high-level play is a good way to figure out which guns/mechs/whatevers are effective and which ones are not effective at all (i.e. never getting used). But the actual opinions of those players should be taken with a grain of salt.

[frumpylumps]

I'm a newer player and from my POV this "un-funning" rhetoric is an entitled bittervet issue.

Un-fun for me is seeing unpopular balance changes walked back because of the meta-entrenched raising hell on twitter. This is a negative no matter how you look at it.

Edited by frumpylumps, 13 May 2018 - 10:09 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

frumpylumps, on 13 May 2018 - 10:05 AM, said:

From my POV this "un-funning" stuff is an entitled bittervet issue.

Un-fun for me is seeing unpopular balance changes walked back because of the meta-entrenched raising hell on twitter. I don't enjoy playing games where babies get their way.

The people you are calling "meta-entrenched" are actually the ones trying to stir up the meta the most. But if you don't understand the game well enough, it only looks like they are trying to keep a particular meta because their approach is trying to retain a high skill ceiling.

[frumpylumps]

Yeonne Greene, on 13 May 2018 - 10:08 AM, said:

The people you are calling "meta-entrenched" are actually the ones trying to stir up the meta the most.

please explain. That doesn't make sense to me by how i understand those words.

Edited by frumpylumps, 13 May 2018 - 12:09 PM.

[Sereglach]

Yeonne Greene, on 13 May 2018 - 10:08 AM, said:

The people you are calling "meta-entrenched" are actually the ones trying to stir up the meta the most. But if you don't understand the game well enough, it only looks like they are trying to keep a particular meta because their approach is trying to retain a high skill ceiling.

While I mostly agree with this statement, there's also ZERO reason to walk back those laser changes in their attempt to curb the extreme high-alpha laser vomit. It should have at least been given a chance. The people screaming for that change to not happen are, in fact, some of the people who don't want the meta to change. The reason they're crying is because it will ruin all of their current-meta-laser-vomit builds.

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

Personal opinion, but I think the introduction of all the new weapons tech just shows more and more that ditching energy draw was a very bad move for PGI to make. Ghost Heat is getting completely unmanageable with its convoluted layers of weapons combinations; and this recent round of attempted laser changes just shows it. You can't balance one weapon in a vacuum when there's 40+ other weapons it could be mounted with.

. . . and that's not even touching on all of the other bad and/or poorly executed decisions that PGI has made. While I think MW5 could be an awesome game, I also think it's going to completely (aside from Alex's art) depend upon just how comprehensive the modding support is to decide whether even that game will be viable. That's solely based upon the fact that PGI can't get MWO balance and gameplay right, so it's basically a given that they're not going to get MW5 right.

JediPanther, on 13 May 2018 - 08:38 AM, said:

I've not spend a dime on this game since the urban mech came out. I don't give a dam about 'funding' pgi's court battle no matter how much I hate HG. you can spend all the money you want. I've got bills to pay such as rent and food. it is a sad fact pgi basically told Dane and everyone else to f-off while giving us unobtainable criteria that must be met for pgi to even thing of making suggested changes yet crying on twitter to russ over some thing so lame as laser changes to clans causes russ to crap his pants and veto the laser changes before they were even made via the actual patch.

I'll gladly spend my money on this game when the devs and russ himself figures out this game is not and never will be an esport and they begin to make logical sound changes involving the community in a very much more active manner including use of the pts and their own god dam forum instead of crybabies-on-twitter-to-company-president. They have someone with the label of community manager too but what does that job mean? Nothing apparently here.

Amen. A-fricking-men. I haven't spent money on the game since Origins IIC, for pretty much the exact same reasons.

The sad part is, it'd only take a few small changes and fixes to the game to get me to open my wallet, but PGI/Russ are dead set on NOT doing them.

[Mystere]

Sereglach, on 13 May 2018 - 12:05 PM, said:

Personal opinion, but I think the introduction of all the new weapons tech just shows more and more that ditching energy draw was a very bad move for PGI to make. Ghost Heat is getting completely unmanageable with its convoluted layers of weapons combinations; and this recent round of attempted laser changes just shows it. You can't balance one weapon in a vacuum when there's 40+ other weapons it could be mounted with.

The first iteration of energy draw was simple. The last was heading towards the same complexity of ghost heat, which is why it was dubbed GH2.0.

It did not help matters that PGI was also testing other changes at the same time as ED.

Edited by Mystere, 13 May 2018 - 12:16 PM.

[Sereglach]

Mystere, on 13 May 2018 - 12:15 PM, said:

The first iteration of energy draw was simple. The last was heading towards the same complexity of ghost heat, which is why it was dubbed GH2.0.

It did not help matters that PGI was also testing other changes at the same time as ED.

Not arguing that, but it is/was still the best bet we have had on actually fixing some of the major meta problems we have with the game. Sadly, PGI hasn't had a decent track record of focusing their efforts on fixing the inherent problems with the game; and they haven't had the conviction to actually stick with a needed change before backing down when a few people -who don't want the meta to change- cry at Russ on Twitter.

[Mcgral18]

frumpylumps, on 13 May 2018 - 10:29 AM, said:

please explain. That doesn't make sense to me by how i understand those words.

PGIs changes would reduce the amount of viable weapons yet again, leaving an even smaller amount used at the top level.


IE, digging their meta trench even deeper.




What would be better would be to bring the trash tier back from the dead. They used to be useful, until PGI went at them.



Some Cryhards want everything brought down to pillow fighting, though.

[YueFei]

frumpylumps, on 13 May 2018 - 10:29 AM, said:

please explain. That doesn't make sense to me by how i understand those words.

To add to what McGral said:

I'm a casual player, and I don't really try to chase the "meta" by going for what's necessarily the most effective builds. I recognize this as self-limiting, but I'm OK with that because I like a particular style of play and that's what I want to get out of my gaming experience. I would wager that most casual players kind of do that, playing with mechs and weapons that suit their style of fun, rather than narrowly focusing on what would be the deadliest mechs and weapons.

Now, top players crave complexity and crave for more options. Tic-tac-toe is not a competitively-played game because it's super shallow and is essentially solved. Top players want more mechs and more weapons to be viable.

However, what has primarily kept PGI fearful of buffing underperforming weapons has been the TTK boogeyman. And in fact, PGI has historically come down with the nerf hammer on weapons which didn't deserve it.

Naturally, nerfing down some weapons makes other weapons better alternatives. That is, until PGI nerfs those other weapons as well, if they haven't done so yet.

It didn't help that PGI handled the mech re-scaling and engine desync poorly, which left many mechs being even bigger than they were, and lacking in agility. That made it even more difficult to properly mitigate incoming damage, so that despite even larger healthpools now with the Skill Tree, and routine nerfs to weapons, TTK still hasn't really changed.

The problem with randomly nerfing weapons that didn't deserve it is that it hurts the casual player the most. The guy who maybe doesn't spend lots of time researching mechs and builds to see what works best. The guy who doesn't even bother reading the patch notes from start to finish, but is suddenly left wondering why it seems like his guns aren't killing robots as effectively anymore. The guy who slaps on some weapons because he thinks they are cool, but he happened to be unlucky because those are the weapons which were smacked by PGI's nerf hammer.

The Competitive guy's performance won't be impacted. He's flexible, he'll just run the numbers, switch mechs and weapons, and test in "live fire" scenarios. He's not overly attached to any particular weapon or play style, his end-goal is to Just Win Baby. He would love to have greater variety and nuance and options, because that opens the door for a greater number of strategies and tactics, but at the end of the day, he'll still have the firepower he needs to stomp on casual players like me. And that's fine, that's as it should be. That is not a "problem" that PGI needs to "solve" by nerfing the weapons I got killed by.

You know, I introduced a friend to this game. He played competitive Counterstrike (so he's not a potato). At heart, he enjoys close combat, he lives to brawl. So he picked up MWO, just to play on a casual basis with me, and he went for equipping AC20 & SRMs. Then PGI nerfed AC20, and nerfed SRMs to 1.5 damage per missile. He.... quit the game, and never came back.