23 replies to this topic

[The pessimistic optimist]

This really get at the the hart of some of MWO problems. Great minds think alike

Edited by SirSmokes, 20 February 2021 - 06:26 AM.

[Thorqemada]

Good Video with a lot of insight.

I differ at Music and Bitchin Betty, i really would not play a game that sounds like the acoustic hell the Thunderbolt beeping hell demo was - anyhing else is pretty spot on.

[PocketYoda]

While a lot is right i disagree with his music.. I like Butt rock and Betty shes helped me out a lot.. Please don't dis Betty.

Edited by Samial, 20 February 2021 - 07:09 PM.

[GuardDogg]

My Opinion on 12 vs 12.

From the board game, we had 12 mechs vs (opponent) 12 mechs. Max weight per side. Three lances of 4 mechs. They consisted of "Command Lance, Fire Lance, Recon Lance". Some books had maps, and tactical information and what to use (Mechs for lances). Just like the tactical PC game "MechCommander" One book for example: Tales of The Black Widow Company". At the back of the book, shows what mechs, class. Some books were field manuals, tactical readouts, technical read outs, novels, and more. The maps were folded, and were small (everything was paper). To the point, (even myself), made a huge map to put my mech miniatures on. I made buildings, roads, and purchased trees (from the places where they sold trains sets as a hobby) to get more of the battlefield. Piloting a mech in a computer game is a lot more different. The maps need fixing for 8vs8, and larger for 12 vs 12.

Now on MWO, I even said the maps are very small and if map like polar was 10 times bigger would be awesome. Then realizing players will have no patience walking around to scout, gather information, but only prefer to fight in the first minutes. (The thought of getting in and out of a mech, and then doing other things is a dream game that will never happen (realism)). Waiting for that map going in/out of mechs bay (bases) inside mountains, or under ground OR that one map, you power up inside a mech base (building like MW4), then walk out.

Their is a lot missing in MWO, and things do need adjusting.
Myself in DCS, years before MWO, that the sim has improved more in graphics, and fixes. Constant updates. DCS even made a aircraft carrier with people doing their things, before take off. It is more of a simulator than a game. More realism.

Edited by GuardDogg, 20 February 2021 - 10:28 PM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

GuardDogg, on 20 February 2021 - 09:27 PM, said:

My Opinion on 12 vs 12.

From the board game, we had 12 mechs vs (opponent) 12 mechs. Max weight per side. Three lances of 4 mechs. They consisted of "Command Lance, Fire Lance, Recon Lance". Some books had maps, and tactical information and what to use (Mechs for lances). Just like the tactical PC game "MechCommander" One book for example: Tales of The Black Widow Company". At the back of the book, shows what mechs, class. Some books were field manuals, tactical readouts, technical read outs, novels, and more. The maps were folded, and were small (everything was paper). To the point, (even myself), made a huge map to put my mech miniatures on. I made buildings, roads, and purchased trees (from the places where they sold trains sets as a hobby) to get more of the battlefield. Piloting a mech in a computer game is a lot more different. The maps need fixing for 8vs8, and larger for 12 vs 12.

Now on MWO, I even said the maps are very small and if map like polar was 10 times bigger would be awesome. Then realizing players will have no patience walking around to scout, gather information, but only prefer to fight in the first minutes. (The thought of getting in and out of a mech, and then doing other things is a dream game that will never happen (realism)). Waiting for that map going in/out of mechs bay (bases) inside mountains, or under ground OR that one map, you power up inside a mech base (building like MW4), then walk out.

Their is a lot missing in MWO, and things do need adjusting.
Myself in DCS, years before MWO, that the sim has improved more in graphics, and fixes. Constant updates. DCS even made a aircraft carrier with people doing their things, before take off. It is more of a simulator than a game. More realism.

It's not just the maps size and groups size it also the game modes. Right now most game modes it just best to ignore objective most of the time and death ball to win. We need game modes were objective matter more so team have a reason to just to stay in one big murder ball

[ShiverMeRivets]

SirSmokes, on 21 February 2021 - 03:30 AM, said:

It's not just the maps size and groups size it also the game modes. Right now most game modes it just best to ignore objective most of the time and death ball to win. We need game modes were objective matter more so team have a reason to just to stay in one big murder ball

You understand game modes all wrong. The purpose of alternative win conditions is to prevent a team from fortifying themselves at some corner of the map, or to allow a way to end the match without spending 8 minutes of chasing a stealth flee/locust or some other vermin.

Edited by ShiverMeRivets, 21 February 2021 - 10:50 AM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

ShiverMeRivets, on 21 February 2021 - 10:49 AM, said:

You understand game modes all wrong. The purpose of alternative win conditions is to prevent a team from fortifying themselves at some corner of the map, or to allow a way to end the match without spending 8 minutes of chasing a stealth flee/locust or some other vermin.

No the game modes are there to be game modes but there not very good at giving you any reason to want to play the objectives. If that were the case they never would have added skirmish a mode with zero objectives. They mostly all play the same but for conquest the one game mode were people sometimes do play objectives. There skirmish for death-match but pretty much all game modes are played like skirmish and feel pretty much the same most of the time. Game were you have objectives that people want to play would make for a much better game

Edited by SirSmokes, 21 February 2021 - 12:11 PM.

[Wildstreak]

SirSmokes, on 21 February 2021 - 03:30 AM, said:

It's not just the maps size and groups size it also the game modes. Right now most game modes it just best to ignore objective most of the time and death ball to win. We need game modes were objective matter more so team have a reason to just to stay in one big murder ball

Actually no.
I still see the infamous Conquest matches happening where one team has all 12 players dead BUT because the surviving team focused on kills and ignored captures even the Lights, the dead team wins by points.

I see Assault matches where a team wins by most Mechs going to enemy base leaving some behind to fight and yes the capture wins.

I see Domination matches where 1-2 left on one team but they never go back to circle so other team wins by time not kills.

Only Incursion seems to put people off playing objective.

[Mal Bolge]

In an 8v8, lances could have different objectives, and if a lance fails their objective, they will lose. IF properly designed it could break up nascaring, deathballing, and move game play into that golden triangle.

Edited by Mal Nilsum, 21 February 2021 - 02:00 PM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Wildstreak, on 21 February 2021 - 01:58 PM, said:

Actually no.
I still see the infamous Conquest matches happening where one team has all 12 players dead BUT because the surviving team focused on kills and ignored captures even the Lights, the dead team wins by points.

I see Assault matches where a team wins by most Mechs going to enemy base leaving some behind to fight and yes the capture wins.

I see Domination matches where 1-2 left on one team but they never go back to circle so other team wins by time not kills.

Only Incursion seems to put people off playing objective.

"were people sometimes do play objectives" and there are ways to get people to play objectives it just take more clever game design. The way they are setup now yea people mostly choose to ignore objectives. Its the game design and player incentive that dose that.

Edited by SirSmokes, 21 February 2021 - 02:04 PM.

[Wildstreak]

After finally watching whole video, posted as comment there:

- No the UI sucks, suffers from problems seen in many other games.
- Clan weapons are not done right, they are done because PGI could not do Clan Star and up sized teams.
- Music, there is a way to fix it shown in other games but might be too late. I disagree about which music is needed because people like different kinds, again they could just borrow and modify what another game did to solve the music issue.
- The Betty issue is not one for me but I could see having a separate volume control for her voice in Settings.
- Matchmaker should have been 12 IS v 10 Clan, smaller scale 6 IS vs 5 Clan, this would have also changed weapon balance.
The deathball argument does not always work, this is more player behavior than the game and some map spots are bad for deathball though some teams still try.
- The argument about 2 deathballs waiting for enemies to peek, that may actually be the fault of MWO treating Quick Play as a Ranked mode when it should be more like an Unranked mode, other games show this better by having both modes.
- Respawn, no, just hell no.
- Targeting Computers looks like Advanced Zoom.
- War Thunder has about 40x the players MWO has so yeah they get better updates, probably uses a better game engine too.
- MW3 Betty, not for me.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Wildstreak, on 21 February 2021 - 08:51 PM, said:

After finally watching whole video, posted as comment there:

- No the UI sucks, suffers from problems seen in many other games.
- Clan weapons are not done right, they are done because PGI could not do Clan Star and up sized teams.
- Music, there is a way to fix it shown in other games but might be too late. I disagree about which music is needed because people like different kinds, again they could just borrow and modify what another game did to solve the music issue.
- The Betty issue is not one for me but I could see having a separate volume control for her voice in Settings.
- Matchmaker should have been 12 IS v 10 Clan, smaller scale 6 IS vs 5 Clan, this would have also changed weapon balance.
The deathball argument does not always work, this is more player behavior than the game and some map spots are bad for deathball though some teams still try.
- The argument about 2 deathballs waiting for enemies to peek, that may actually be the fault of MWO treating Quick Play as a Ranked mode when it should be more like an Unranked mode, other games show this better by having both modes.
- Respawn, no, just hell no.
- Targeting Computers looks like Advanced Zoom.
- War Thunder has about 40x the players MWO has so yeah they get better updates, probably uses a better game engine too.
- MW3 Betty, not for me.

You don't even bring up some of his best points. Clan weapons are done great and make more sense logically. There are so many things they could do to improve the way this game plays.

[Mochyn Pupur]

SirSmokes, on 22 February 2021 - 01:50 AM, said:

You don't even bring up some of his best points. Clan weapons are done great and make more sense logically. There are so many things they could do to improve the way this game plays.

Clan weapons were drastically nerfed not long after the Clan inception into MWO inner sphere, because they performed as expected and were far more efficient and effective, strapped to superior chassis. However, the nerf was required to balance the game to allow IS to have some chance due to the fixed 12 v 12 set ups instead of 12 v 10 which would have balanced the sides. Further "rebalancing" of the Clan weapons, predominantly the lasers, have almost weakened the Clan mechs to the point there is little difference between sides, other than the expense and utility mode of the Clans being higher or better.

[Gagis]

Clan vs IS balance is probably the greatest achievent of PGI balance team.

In the Battletech board game, the Clans are a pants-on-head dumb addition (both in terms of dumb game design and dumb addition to the fictional universe) that is so outrageously overpowered and ridiculously designed that the board game or any previous video game iteration have not bothered even trying to balance something that crazy.

MWO has a good balance between IS and Clan while retaining some identity between the two. This is an absolutely astonishing achievement. I doubt anyone expected it could be done.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Gagis, on 22 February 2021 - 02:33 AM, said:

Clan vs IS balance is probably the greatest achievent of PGI balance team.

In the Battletech board game, the Clans are a pants-on-head dumb addition (both in terms of dumb game design and dumb addition to the fictional universe) that is so outrageously overpowered and ridiculously designed that the board game or any previous video game iteration have not bothered even trying to balance something that crazy.

MWO has a good balance between IS and Clan while retaining some identity between the two. This is an absolutely astonishing achievement. I doubt anyone expected it could be done.

And the way their weapons work just makes sense. Lighter LRM launcher are lighter because they fire in stages so they can be lighter firing all missiles at the same time is a lot force to contain, firing a different ammo type for ACs to make them lighter but doing the same level of damage,longer burn times on lasers is how they do more damage ect a lot of it just make more logical sense and it keeps it for feeling samey and just better version IS tech. And the clan tech is better then IS tech thats why IS mechs have such great quirks

Edited by SirSmokes, 22 February 2021 - 04:05 AM.

[LordNothing]

Samial, on 20 February 2021 - 07:07 PM, said:

While a lot is right i disagree with his music.. I like Butt rock and Betty shes helped me out a lot.. Please don't dis Betty.

i didnt even know mwo had music. but the mw5 sound track was awesome. though i expect something like thrash or industrial. butt rock is before my time, at least generationally. my music tastes span like 300 years and i spent the grunge era listening to 80s trash (both german and bay area scenes).

Edited by LordNothing, 22 February 2021 - 06:18 AM.

[ShiverMeRivets]

[redacted]

The clans for all their weapon superiority and Fascist ideology thoroughly lost on Tukayyid to a telephone company, so there is that too.

Edited by Ekson Valdez, 22 February 2021 - 10:58 AM.
quote cleanup

[VonBruinwald]

ShiverMeRivets, on 22 February 2021 - 06:52 AM, said:

The clans for all their weapon superiority and Fascist ideology thoroughly lost on Tukayyid to a telephone company, so there is that too.

Real-life doesn't have in plot armour. But then again, the way Comstar "threw bodies at a problem till the problem went away" speaks less of plot armour and more of victory at any cost:

[Anjian]

SirSmokes, on 20 February 2021 - 06:25 AM, said:

This really get at the the hart of some of MWO problems. Great minds think alike

People don't seem to realize this much, but one reason why War Thunder and its ilk keeps going on and on is because the Russian games industry is ruthless and relentless competition, regardless of platform. They love their tactical war games.

Its World of Tanks vs. War Thunder vs. World of Warships vs. Cross Out vs. Star Conflict vs. Armored Warfare vs. War Robots vs. Robot Warfare, and on and on.

This is relentless improvement in the face of relentless competition.

[Ekson Valdez]

Removed Off-topic and derailing posts. Stay on topic, please.