54 replies to this topic

[Willard Phule]

East Indy, on 08 November 2020 - 12:00 PM, said:

Three minor changes to strikes:

1. Friendlies see a different (colorblind-friendly) colored smoke.
2. Damage is scaled for tonnage.
3. A player's second strike does only 50% damage.

1. What purpose does changing the color make? It's not a freaking powerup everyone should be running at. You could put up a Mech sized "do not enter" sign and these chuckleheads would still run right at it.

2. That could easily be accomplished by simply enlarging the spread pattern, as opposed to taking out more shells. Smaller, lighter mechs can and will get out of the blast zone quicker than heavier ones.

3. If it weren't for the skill tree tax already in place to use multiple strikes, I'd agree. Besides, that's probably more coding intensive than we should probably expect. If nothing else, increase the skill tax on it like hitting it with the nerf bat.

[R5D4]

Darian DelFord, on 08 November 2020 - 06:14 PM, said:

Lots of good ideas and sarcasm in here... I like it.

Arties and Airs were put into the game to get people moving. They would just clump and play pokey pokey. Strikes were put in to prevent this.


Not that it did anything to curb that behavior. Now they are just used as risk free damage. While I will agree the initial intent of the strikes were good, they actual implantation, as per PGI norms, is seriously flawed.

This is a relatively simple fix, I mean seriously it is, just have to figure out which way to go. The first thing I would recommend would be a maximum number of strikes per team per match. Its a start...

Please keep discussing.

You're right on both counts; it was brought in to address a certain problem and now it no longer works the way it was intended and even worse it's being exploited and is disproportionately biased against one class of mech vs. the others. It definitely needs adjustment.

Increasing cool down, applying more equal damage per mech tonnage and making it more visible (all vision modes for example) would seem to be an appropriate way to make less obnoxious.

[Hattifnatten]

Here's a good example of how ******** strikes are.

I'm in a perfect position on a pretty fresh heavy mech dealing shitload of damage without return fire. And suddenly I'm damaged from 85% to 60% in one strike placed god knows where. ******* ridiculous.

And you know what's the best option against this? NASCAR.

[RickySpanish]

They're fine mechanically, but the warning needs to be better. For friendly strikes they need to be marked with a circle and a pillar of light on the HUD, plus a warning to all friendlies when activated and a marker on the minimap. Enemy strikes need to have an incoming audio cue plus maybe a last second area of effect marker on the ground.

[w0qj]

So is there *any* way to "see" the red smoke from artillery & air strikes while in Heat (Thermal) Vision?

w0qj, on 07 November 2020 - 10:05 PM, said:

I hate it when you're using Heat (Thermal) Vision, and you just cannot see the smoke "warning" from the artillery & air strikes.

I wish Heat (Thermal) Vision would indicate such a warning.

[Swamp Ass MkII]

All in all, leave the strikes alone. If you don't want hit by strikes, don't stand in them, move more.

[Krovakon]

Once I see the artillery spam start I usually just quit the match and find a different one. Dying from a single artillery shell from full health is beyond stupid and I have no idea how they thought it was okay letting a consumable you can't even see completely obliterate your mech from full health to 0 with no warning because the smoke was used in front of the building you were behind, or on the cliff directly above you or next to an assault mech you're about to round the corner and backstab. I can be running around the map, run around the corner, see red smoke, turn to run away and instantly half my mech is gone if not outright destroyed. If for whatever deranged reason PGI absolutely insists on keeping them in, they should be hard capped to the damage they deal based on tonnage. Currently if you get hit by multiple artillery shells during a barrage as an assault mech around 5%-10% of your health is gone, annoying but not a massive deal. Get hit by 1 artillery shell during a barrage as a light? You instantly die. Someone just spent 40,000 C-BILLS to instantly remove a full health mech from the game with the only risk being exposing themselves from the front for half a second.
I literally cannot play anything smaller than 35 tons because a single artillery shell will destroy the mech from full health and a 35 tonner can barely survive a single shell without dying or losing half their mech.

Edited by Krovakon, 09 November 2020 - 09:28 AM.

[Darian DelFord]

Again another example. No idea that one was placed behind me and BAM!!!!!!! 53% of my armor gone!!!!

Edited by Darian DelFord, 14 November 2020 - 07:02 PM.

[Willard Phule]

Hattifnatten, on 09 November 2020 - 04:04 AM, said:

Here's a good example of how ******** strikes are.

I'm in a perfect position on a pretty fresh heavy mech dealing shitload of damage without return fire. And suddenly I'm damaged from 85% to 60% in one strike placed god knows where. ******* ridiculous.

And you know what's the best option against this? NASCAR.

Wanna know how NASCAR happens? Nobody wants to have idiots back into them, so they work off to the side to get out of the way of the idiot in reverse. When enough of the team is trying to get out of the way, it naturally works itself into a circle.

Wanna stop NASCAR? STOP BACKING INTO YOUR TEAMMATES. It's really just as simple as that.

[Hattifnatten]

Willard Phule, on 15 November 2020 - 08:42 AM, said:

Wanna stop NASCAR? STOP BACKING INTO YOUR TEAMMATES. It's really just as simple as that.

I don't want to stop nascar, its more fun than getting arty striked into oblivion.

[Horseman]

Willard Phule, on 15 November 2020 - 08:42 AM, said:

Wanna know how NASCAR happens? Nobody wants to have idiots back into them, so they work off to the side to get out of the way of the idiot in reverse. When enough of the team is trying to get out of the way, it naturally works itself into a circle.

What I'm observing tends to be more along the lines of: reasonably fast mechs move to flank the enemy, slower mechs follow them like sheep, forcing other teammates to also follow or die to a numerically superior enemy force.
Ultimately I'd say the main fault for this is on mechs which weren't fast enough to move with the flankers but attempted to do so anyway. That's what starts the chain reaction.

[Willard Phule]

Horseman, on 15 November 2020 - 02:27 PM, said:

What I'm observing tends to be more along the lines of: reasonably fast mechs move to flank the enemy, slower mechs follow them like sheep, forcing other teammates to also follow or die to a numerically superior enemy force.
Ultimately I'd say the main fault for this is on mechs which weren't fast enough to move with the flankers but attempted to do so anyway. That's what starts the chain reaction.

If I'm faster than the teammate in reverse, zoomed in so much he doesn't have a clue what's in his peripheral vision, why wouldn't I try to get out of his way? He's a danger to himself and others. And, if his situational awareness is so abysmal to not know he's shooting his own teammates, he deserves to get left behind to be wolfpacked. That's normally something you'd consider might be learned somewhere between T-Cadet and T1.

Apparently, unzooming and paying attention to what your team's doing is advanced skills. Beyond what can be measured by the carefully thought out tier system.

Edited by Willard Phule, 15 November 2020 - 04:15 PM.

[Squiggy McPew]

Willard Phule, on 15 November 2020 - 08:42 AM, said:

Wanna stop NASCAR? STOP BACKING INTO YOUR TEAMMATES. It's really just as simple as that.

A better question would be why are you blocking someone from backing up? If you see a mech in front of you poking for a shot why would you step behind them knowing they will need to step back into cover?

[Willard Phule]

Squiggy McPew, on 16 November 2020 - 06:36 AM, said:

A better question would be why are you blocking someone from backing up? If you see a mech in front of you poking for a shot why would you step behind them knowing they will need to step back into cover?

That question makes a lot of assumptions, like they were there first. Many times, that's not the case. Again, note that I mentioned zooming in so your peripheral vision is cut down and a complete lack of situational awareness. It's those two things that inevitably causes the entire situation to begin with.

Now, me personally, I have ZERO problem sucking up the FF penalty and just pretending like they're not there and firing through them at the enemy. Most people aren't. But, you have a choice when an idiot backs into you. Shoot them or get out of the way. There's not much in between.

[K O Z A K]

Willard Phule, on 16 November 2020 - 07:08 AM, said:

Now, me personally, I have ZERO problem sucking up the FF penalty and just pretending like they're not there and firing through them at the enemy. Most people aren't. But, you have a choice when an idiot backs into you. Shoot them or get out of the way. There's not much in between.

So not only are you blocking people who can't see you, you also intentionally shoot them in the back, because the zoomed in mech in front of you fighting the enemy, who has no rear view camera is supposed to know you're behind them and get out of your way because you're so important

[Willard Phule]

Hazeclaw, on 16 November 2020 - 08:03 AM, said:

So not only are you blocking people who can't see you, you also intentionally shoot them in the back, because the zoomed in mech in front of you fighting the enemy, who has no rear view camera is supposed to know you're behind them and get out of your way because you're so important

The zoomed in idiot in front of me should have known I was there before he walked in front of me in the first place. I fail to see how it's my fault that he's zoomed in and completely situationally aware. As for team damage, guilty as charged. I could care less if I shot the idiot backing into me as long as I kill the enemy in front of me. Call it "unintentional armor sharing."

[Daemonara]

The massive amount of strikes per game can be utterly absurd, and not to mention boring to drop in and be blown in two before even engaging the enemy...
At least revert back to a maximum of one strike per player.

[PurplePuke]

I love strikes. I use them all the time. Most of the time they don't accomplish much except to break the enemy up. Sometimes they help.

But when I get damaged/killed by one, I don't go onto the forums begging and whining for it to be changed.

[Kroete]

Just make it that all the consumables need slots and have a little weight?

[VonBruinwald]

Kroete, on 03 December 2020 - 04:26 AM, said:

Just make it that all the consumables need slots and have a little weight?

Strikes/arty should require a Narc or Tag be equipped as a prerequisite to function. Afterall, you are designating a target.

They also need a range limit, how is it my ERPPC/Gauss/LRMS cap out at <2000m but my smoke-flare can be thrown 5k!