166 replies to this topic

[Mattiator]

It's something that will fracture the playerbase heavily like it did in MW4. So no.

[That Guy]

why is this thread still here? NOTHING good comes from NHUA. NHUA has no place in this game

do the WOT people have lots of demands for unlimited ammo and regenerating health, with no critical hits matchs? no? thats what i thought, now kindly go stick your NHUA head in a bucket of piranha fish. thank you

/thread FFS

[Cik]

CW Grayson, on 31 March 2012 - 01:41 AM, said:

That's what i said.



Because they want to play here. If the Devs decide to give them a place here, it couldn't be bad.



Then just don't play that server(s), simple as that.



Uhm, that's just... dumb. Answer why and perhaps there will be a discussion. Otherwise i see you just try to rack your postcount.

because it's an antithesis of sim, because it's against the lore. because it attracts the wrong crowd. because it turns the game into a quakeclone. because it splits the community down the middle, and because most of the people that want it are terrible casuals that ruin games. it ruined mw4, don't let it ruin this as well.

[GaussDragon]

Mautty the Bobcat, on 30 March 2012 - 03:46 PM, said:

I think the best thing to do in this case, and which has been said multiple times before, is to create a non-ranked style match for NHUA games.

You don't earn XP, C-bills, ANYTHING, but you also don't have repair costs. This would be a game mode to blow off steam and blow stuff up plain and simple. I personally prefer to play HOLA myself and I had joined a MW4 league simply for the reason that I was tired of the NHUA games being the only ones that ever had populated pubs to play in.

I'd like to take a moment to thank you for being one of the only reasonable people here.

If you don't like NHUA, don't play it.

[Ghost]

Clearly a divisive topic. If you guys can't keep things civil, this thread will be closed.

[Fooooo]

Definately a hotbed this one.


I'll just say a few words and leave this one for good.

No heat and ammo in MW2/3/4 was just cheats without having to enter some code. Like games that give you an Invincibility option in the menu. Its a cheat to make the game easy so you can finish it.....if you couldn't already.

For multiplayer I guess its a slightly different can of worms but I still consider it useless as it removes the "point" of the game.

When you dont have to watch anything, or worry about anything your no longer thinking at all and just going through motions which to me is very........robotic and you never learn that way IMO.

[Wraith 1]

Yeah! Removing ammo and heat restrictions is a GREAT idea! While we're at it, we should remove the PPCs too! And the hula girls! And the Battlemechs! And everything else that makes BattleTech and MechWarrior what they are! And we should replace the Atlas from MW with the Atlas from Portal, and give it a lazor that shoots out nyan cats! And there should be random buildings that play Rebecca Black songs non-stop and if you destroy them you instantly die IRL!

/togglesarcasm

Anyone who wants NHUA:
These are not the Battlemechs you are looking for.

I feel like unleashing the fury of the capslock, but I won't.

[T0RC4ED]

HOLA (Heat On Limited Ammo) is the only way to play. But if they must include NHUA they should make it unranked that way if you insist on playing like that you do so for fun and nothing else.

Edited by T0RC4ED, 01 April 2012 - 02:06 AM.

[Charles Martel]

I just say "No" to NHUA.

[A6PackofToucans]

Back in MW3 and MW4 online our unit used to jump into an occasional NHUA game to blow off steam and just see what it was like. After trying dozens of matches, in my opinion the problem with NHUA is that it simply destroys any balance there was in the Battletech universe.

Ballistic weapons always have a bit more punch, but now I don't need to allocate any tonnage for extra ammo.
ER Large Lasers and PPC were heat mongers, but I don't need to add 20 heat sinks to keep that in check anymore. Add in the 6 ERPPC 4 ER LL Daishi's and it gets a little crazy in those games.

I found that for myself at least, that it was creating bad habits in my piloting skills when I played HOLA games after running through a few NHUA, so I really cut down on playing like that.

There's nothing "wrong" with playing the NHUA way, I can see where it can help newcomers to this series by allowing them to get familiar with how some of the weapons work, but when people only play the game this way it does create separate gaming factions and bad blood in the online community, same as it did when there was fights between 1st person mech pilots and 3rd person pilots.

The whole point of the Battletch universe was being a pilot inside his or her mech and working within the parameters of your weapons systems, riding that heat spike, deciding should I really fire my PPC right now after I got hit with that flamer? Is my MASC causing enough overheat that I would want to restrict my firing time? Should I slow down, and turn off MASC to cool down faster, or try to make it to that ridgline to help my buddies sooner? Can I get to that small lake in the distance to help my heat situation so I can fire my large laser?

The examples above are all game changing tactical situations that mechwarriors learn to think about, and thats only with worrying about heat!! Think of the other times you guys played and had to think about your ammunition problems on top of all that, or your weapons groupings and firing sequences. That's what piloting a Mech is all about, that's what the Mechwarrior experience is all about, and learning to play the sim this way is something that should be rewarded and is rewarding when you take some time to learn it.

Years ago we had a few instances where we got a few NHUA guys and walked them through the process on playing HOLA with us, "it's not as fast paced as the more bump and twitch and quick firing style as NHUA is" they complained, but it has many rewards all it's own once you master it.

When the sim comes out, I hope some of you guys will take the time to help others out online in learning the ropes. I remember a very sad Daishi that did not know the Mechwarrior universe, what his weapons did, or how to communicate in chat so we spent hours that night talking him through the process of his mech and systems while he shook the daishi's head "yes" or "No" until we got his chat going lol. Instant online gaming buddy to play with for years!! And he learned his heat spikes and ammo restrictions and loved playing that way.

Be understanding guys, we all come from many different backgrounds, put yourself in someone elses shoes for a bit. NHUA can be fun sometimes, but it's not for everyone, including me and if we're to follow canon in MWO then I don't feel NHUA should be part of a money or points reward system as it would literally turn the universe on it's head in how the battles would play out.

[Catamount]

GaussDragon, on 31 March 2012 - 02:09 PM, said:

I'd like to take a moment to thank you for being one of the only reasonable people here.

If you don't like NHUA, don't play it.

After weighing the comments made on the topic, I really think I disagree with that position, and here's why:

If people want a simplistic game with few considerations besides having a faster, twitchier finger so they can BOOM HEADSHOT a tenth of a second faster than the next guy, look, there's not far south of a million different games on the internet where people can do that. I even have some of them. I already have a copy of BF3 for exactly that purpose.

What there aren't nearly a million of are games that are Mechwarrior. In fact, there are no games that are anything close to being Mechwarrior (MWLL mod aside, and even it falls short). MWO will be unique in that respect.

So I really don't see the purpose of amending MWO with all sorts of ways to make it not Mechwarrior, because there are already innumerable games out there that aren't Mechwarrior, including more than a few with big stompy robots and giant explosions.


NHUA does just that; it amends it with a game mode that isn't really what Mechwarrior/BT was ever supposed to be. More than that, it sets a scary precedent here. Why not have a 3rd person server by the same reasoning? Why not a "pick up powerups" server with lava cannons and energy shields? Why not have a Gundam/Zoids/AC/Megazord server? I can think of a million different ways to make a game that isn't Mechwarrior, but since there are already a million games out there that already achieve that, I'd rather have the devs do the absolute best job they can on focusing on making MWO nothing but the best game that is Mechwarrior, because this is the only game that is doing that. It doesn't add, and in my opinion, even actively detracts from MWO, to toss a bunch of things that are neither MW nor simulation, into the only game that's actually setting itself apart by being those two things.

If that's what people want, well those games already exist in abundance; there's no need to add them here. They can go pick up a copy of BF2142 if that's what they want, since that's almost exactly what the 2142 mechs ("walkers") behave like.

Edited by Catamount, 01 April 2012 - 07:40 AM.

[GaussDragon]

Catamount, on 01 April 2012 - 07:36 AM, said:

After weighing the comments made on the topic, I really think I disagree with that position, and here's why:

If people want a simplistic game with few considerations besides having a faster, twitchier finger so they can BOOM HEADSHOT a tenth of a second faster than the next guy, look, there's not far south of a million different games on the internet where people can do that. I even have some of them. I already have a copy of BF3 for exactly that purpose.

What there aren't nearly a million of are games that are Mechwarrior. In fact, there are no games that are anything close to being Mechwarrior (MWLL mod aside, and even it falls short). MWO will be unique in that respect.

So I really don't see the purpose of amending MWO with all sorts of ways to make it not Mechwarrior, because there are already innumerable games out there that aren't Mechwarrior, including more than a few with big stompy robots and giant explosions.


NHUA does just that; it amends it with a game mode that isn't really what Mechwarrior/BT was ever supposed to be. More than that, it sets a scary precedent here. Why not have a 3rd person server by the same reasoning? Why not a "pick up powerups" server with lava cannons and energy shields? Why not have a Gundam/Zoids/AC/Megazord server? I can think of a million different ways to make a game that isn't Mechwarrior, but since there are already a million games out there that already achieve that, I'd rather have the devs do the absolute best job they can on focusing on making MWO nothing but the best game that is Mechwarrior, because this is the only game that is doing that. It doesn't add, and in my opinion, even actively detracts from MWO, to toss a bunch of things that are neither MW nor simulation, into the only game that's actually setting itself apart by being those two things.

If that's what people want, well those games already exist in abundance; there's no need to add them here. They can go pick up a copy of BF2142 if that's what they want, since that's almost exactly what the 2142 mechs ("walkers") behave like.

I have BF3 and played it a lot. Based on what I've seen of MWO and my prior experience with mech games, adding a casual feature like NHUA does not immediately bring it closer to BF3 than it would the rest of the MWO game proper. What you're doing here is probably the most common argumentative fallacy found on these forums; which is the slippery slope one. I have a more 'open' approach to this game than others but I have my limits too. Saying that I'm in favour of an option for NHUA does not equate to me wanting CallofMechWarrior or am in favour of power ups. You're putting words in my mouth. It's sad that every time some un-orthodox or un-traditional idea gets suggested, the poster has to be berated with a stream of absurd remarks equating this game to CoD, it's pathetic. I liked NHUA because it was, as others pointed out, some casual fun and great for blowing off steam. I like HOLA too.

I'm in favour of limiting the rewards gained in NHUA too, mostly because I'm convinced that a lot of the cash shop is tied into the meta-game/progression. I took a similar position when we had a debate about respawn versus no-respawn a few months ago. I was in favour of both because they both have their qualities. Just like HOLA and NHUA do, but like NHUA, I was in favour of limiting the rewards for infinite respawn games that were played outside of the meta-game because it's not as beneficial in regards to what I assume will be part of the revenue model (I could be wrong, no doubt).

Here's the the link to my post in regards to the no-respawn debate. In it, you'll find a more detailed set of reasons why I'm in favour of both play types, which apply to NHUA to some degree.

http://mwomercs.com/...dpost__p__82602

[Catamount]

GaussDragon, on 01 April 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

I have BF3 and played it a lot. Based on what I've seen of MWO and my prior experience with mech games, adding a casual feature like NHUA does not immediately bring it closer to BF3 than it would the rest of the MWO game proper. What you're doing here is probably the most common argumentative fallacy found on these forums; which is the slippery slope one. I have a more 'open' approach to this game than others but I have my limits too. Saying that I'm in favour of an option for NHUA does not equate to me wanting CallofMechWarrior or am in favour of power ups. You're putting words in my mouth. It's sad that every time some un-orthodox or un-traditional idea gets suggested, the poster has to be berated with a stream of absurd remarks equating this game to CoD, it's pathetic. I liked NHUA because it was, as others pointed out, some casual fun and great for blowing off steam. I like HOLA too.

I'm in favour of limiting the rewards gained in NHUA too, mostly because I'm convinced that a lot of the cash shop is tied into the meta-game/progression. I took a similar position when we had a debate about respawn versus no-respawn a few months ago. I was in favour of both because they both have their qualities. Just like HOLA and NHUA do, but like NHUA, I was in favour of limiting the rewards for infinite respawn games that were played outside of the meta-game because it's not as beneficial in regards to what I assume will be part of the revenue model (I could be wrong, no doubt).

Here's the the link to my post in regards to the no-respawn debate. In it, you'll find a more detailed set of reasons why I'm in favour of both play types, which apply to NHUA to some degree.

http://mwomercs.com/...dpost__p__82602

That might be wonderful, except, you know, NO


The slippery slope argument would require that I be claiming that doing one thing would necessarily lead to other, more egregious problems. Since I didn't claim that, it's in fact you who's used one of the most common argumentative fallacies: the straw man

I'm not claiming that NHUA would lead to other worse things; I'm claiming NHUA is already as bad as any of those things, which has nothing to do with the slipper slope argument.


NHUA type games are not what a simulator, or the game setting, are about. If it took the devs absolutely no effort to create, and there were zero rewards for it (not limited, zero), then maybe it could be included as a form of, say, practice rounds (call it "the simulator", as in, in game, you're piloting a practice simulator instead of a real mech), maybe, in that case, I'd be alright with it, but beyond that rather large set of ifs, making it a game type that even approaches equality with the normal is something I (and apparently almost everyone here) would be strongly against. It's not an arcade shooter, and this isn't an arcade shooter community, nor do I have any interest in remotely seeing it become one.

MWO is the last one of the last bastions of even remotely serious simulation, and the last when it comes specifically to Mechwarrior. That should be what this game is, as opposed to "just one of the many play modes with one of the many sections of the community". Everything that sets MWO apart loses its significance, and with it, its emphasis in-game, at that point.

Edited by Catamount, 01 April 2012 - 10:52 AM.

[Requital]

ok, here is a thought...for the people who can't live without Respawn, NH/UA servers, why not make a simulator? Just like what is mentioned in countless BT books. You are linked up on a sim to other people on Solaris, or in your faction. This simulator will gain you a small amount of XP, and would allow for the game play some people in the community desire.

Due to the small rewards, it would not be a complete alternative to gameplay "outside" of the simulator, and because of this, you could ensure that the games realism is kept in hand, but it would also ensure that new pilots have a chance to learn about the game and how it works without starting the game and getting insta-death in the first match against experienced pilots.

As much as I hate to admit it, the first matches I played were NH/UA/Respawn. I had a chance to learn how to play a bit better, quickly grew bored of it, and moved on to H/A/NR and eventually league play. While I don't want to see NH/UA as part of standard gameplay, a simulator would be a way around this.

[GaussDragon]

Catamount, on 01 April 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

NHUA type games are not what a simulator, or the game setting, are about. If it took the devs absolutely no effort to create, and there were zero rewards for it (not limited, zero), then maybe it could be included as a form of, say, practice rounds (call it "the simulator", as in, in game, you're piloting a practice simulator instead of a real mech), maybe, in that case, I'd be alright with it, but beyond that rather large set of ifs, making it a game type that even approaches equality with the normal is something I (and apparently almost everyone here) would be strongly against. It's not an arcade shooter, and this isn't an arcade shooter community, nor do I have any interest in remotely seeing it become one.

MWO is the last one of the last bastions of even remotely serious simulation, and the last when it comes specifically to Mechwarrior. That should be what this game is, as opposed to "just one of the many play modes with one of the many sections of the community". Everything that sets MWO apart loses its significance, and with it, its emphasis in-game, at that point.

I don't believe I was making a straw man argument, but going back and forth over that point is besides what we're trying to do here. I respect you more than other people on the forums and maybe I came off more harsh than I was actually trying to be lol. In any case, you and I simply have a difference of preference. It's hard to say one is more right than the other per se, however I've pointed out my reasons for limiting NHUA. I think NHUA should not offer the full spectrum of XP rewards because I want this game to be able to funnel people into the meta-game where it will be able to monetize and I believe that the meta-game has to have a certain degree of consistency for the sake of many things. In any case, I don't think NHUA changes the substance of the game as badly as others would think it does. Personally, most of the substance is all the other stuff that goes into the game such as the mechs, the maps, textures etc. I think that for the more conservative element, anything that changes their strict conception of the game (I.E. as a simulator) is substantial, therefore, almost every single idea (new or not) that is outside of this conception is met with moderate to high levels of hostility.

Edited by GaussDragon, 01 April 2012 - 11:13 AM.

[Catamount]

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking too, Requital.

It seems to solve the problem for all sides.

[GaussDragon]

Requital, on 01 April 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

ok, here is a thought...for the people who can't live without Respawn, NH/UA servers, why not make a simulator? Just like what is mentioned in countless BT books. You are linked up on a sim to other people on Solaris, or in your faction. This simulator will gain you a small amount of XP, and would allow for the game play some people in the community desire.

Due to the small rewards, it would not be a complete alternative to gameplay "outside" of the simulator, and because of this, you could ensure that the games realism is kept in hand, but it would also ensure that new pilots have a chance to learn about the game and how it works without starting the game and getting insta-death in the first match against experienced pilots.

This is more or less what I'm suggesting except that the 'simulator' is a simply an instanced match where you check the boxes "NH" and "UA" but the outcome of the match has no effect on the meta-game.

Requital, on 01 April 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

As much as I hate to admit it, the first matches I played were NH/UA/Respawn. I had a chance to learn how to play a bit better, quickly grew bored of it, and moved on to H/A/NR and eventually league play. While I don't want to see NH/UA as part of standard gameplay, a simulator would be a way around this.

The first matches I played were also NHUA and respawn. When I started playing HOLA and NR I still liked NHUA and respawn games all the same. I appreciated them both because they were both fun for different reasons.

[Catamount]

GaussDragon, on 01 April 2012 - 11:02 AM, said:

I don't believe I was making a straw man argument, but going back and forth over that point is besides what we're trying to do here. I respect you more than other people on the forums and maybe I came off more harsh than I was actually trying to be lol.

Bah, a little bickering never hurts now and then. We both know nothing was meant by it

As to your post, the problem here is that a lot of people, even myself to a degree, really have been waiting for so long for a real sim-style MW game (and for that matter, a sim-style anything), that there's a reflexive attack-dog reaction to anything perceived as being even a possible threat to that, and in a sense, while I admit it's not always the best attitude, I think it's perfectly understandable.


The long chain of let downs in gaming over the past decade to appeal to the exact type of crowd being appealed to by things like NHUA (not saying there's anything wrong with them; they just tend to shape every aspect of every game now) is one that has created a bit of a sensitive nerve there. For myself, Mech Assault, Star Trek Online, Battlefield 3 (good game, but ****-poor jet-flying mechanics and no coordination of play) represent some of the biggest letdowns in recent memory.


I want a game that, for once focuses on what I want to play, a complex game with complex tactical considerations that isn't "dumbed down" to the point of being simplistic and boring (kind of like BF3 jet-flying mechanics).


As has been said, the Simulator idea does tend to be an okay middle ground. It keeps the emphasis in MWO heavily where it's supposed to be, but still enables us to screw around with other stuff. I just don't want to see parity of emphasis, or anything even remotely approaching it, but then, given how far from the thinking of the devs that is, it's perhaps a little silly to feel threatened by such a possibility. Again, the attack-dog reflex is just there because of a decade-long chain of letdowns of that sort.

Edited by Catamount, 01 April 2012 - 11:13 AM.

[GaussDragon]

Catamount, on 01 April 2012 - 11:12 AM, said:

The long chain of let downs in gaming over the past decade to appeal to the exact type of crowd being appealed to by things like NHUA (not saying there's anything wrong with them; they just tend to shape every aspect of every game now) is one that has created a bit of a sensitive nerve there. For myself, Mech Assault, Star Trek Online, Battlefield 3 (good game, but ****-poor jet-flying mechanics and no coordination of play) represent some of the biggest letdowns in recent memory.

I see where you're coming from, however I think part of the issue is that having such a stringent test for what constitutes a good game is recipe for a letdown. I see so many people on these forums losing their **** at pretty much everything and I think to myself "how can this person ever possibly be satisfied". I take it for granted that this game is going to be more sim-like than MW4, I don't think there's anything wrong with that, it should be a game all its own.

Catamount, on 01 April 2012 - 11:12 AM, said:

As has been said, the Simulator idea does tend to be an okay middle ground. It keeps the emphasis in MWO heavily where it's supposed to be, but still enables us to screw around with other stuff. I just don't want to see parity of emphasis, or anything even remotely approaching it, but then, given how far from the thinking of the devs that is, it's perhaps a little silly to feel threatened by such a possibility. Again, the attack-dog reflex is just there because of a decade-long chain of letdowns of that sort.

And I agree, things like NHUA and perhaps respawn should not have parity of emphasis, the focal point is the meta-game and all the other options should be outside of that, but my reasons for this are somewhat more nuanced, they're not just based on 'I hate it, therefore it must not be'. I try to meet people half-way on a lot things, it's frustrating to find so many of the people on these forums be completely closed-minded to everything that comes up, seeing everything as mutually exclusive with their idea of what the game should be when that's not necessarily the case. I recognize the fact that there are many competing preferences here and if I were to simply suggest one type because it's the one I like, at the expense of all the others, then I'd be no better than the people I'm debating with.

At the same time, I recognize that the sim/purist crowd is a faction of itself, but I think it's wrong to cater this game exclusively to that crowd as if it's the only one in existence or the only one that matters, because it isn't true or fair. What I see a lot if people saying things like "it splits the community" when as Dlagradeth pointed out, the split was always there, it's just that one side of the argument is over-represented on these forums. I talk to the other side frequently, they exist too, but you know who dwarfs both of our camps? All the people who will play this game the day it comes out who don't have much experience with this game at all. Since the gaming community has grown and F2P games make themselves very accessible, I'm fairly certain that number of people with none or hardly any prior MW experience eclipses us both and I think steps should be taken to ease them into the game rather than going 'takeitorleaveitrabblerabblrabble'. As Lucifer Black pointed out in another thread

"I don't post often and I'm generally pretty laid back but I just got sick of noobs and non-Battletech historians getting shut down by people who seem to be determined to make the MWO community as inaccessible as possible."

This is what worries me the most; completely alienating our chances and realistically growing the potential player base. We don't necessarily have to see it as a binary, I think if we actually try to put our heads into it, both (or more) sides can be happy with compromising this game too badly or even at all, it's just frustrating that so many people dismiss pretty much everything out of hand and prefer to be jackasses about it as if this game is being made exclusively for them.

[Requital]

it has nothing to do with alienating players. The reality is, there are games out there that have had success with cookie cutter copying MMO's and franchises already on the market by appealing to everyone and trying not to be everything to one person, but something to everyone (see WoW).

The reality is, that while games of this nature can be successful, more often they are a failure. For every one WoW in the MMO world, there have been a thousand failures. What can keep a niche game going is a dedicated player base.

That means that you have to either make the game accessible and enjoyable to all, and fight big name titles out there that are well established(like BF), and good luck with that...or you have to find your niche, make compromises that community can live with to make it work for people who may not like the setting/rules of your MMO.

While I have no problem with simulators, and I think most people wouldn't, it needs to be kept away from the main drops. I would be really PO'd to get a 4ppc alpha strike from a beginner pilot and die in a light mech because he didn't click the heat button(and I did), when if he was playing heat mode I could have beaten him in 1VS1. It would cause major balance issues, which is why most of the community has a closed mind to this.

I am all for a place that players can play indefinitely should they love MW but hate the skill involved, but I would like the incentive for them to come out of the simulator after a couple weeks of practice and learn to beat veteran pilots at their own game. A simulator would give new pilots a chance to earn some XP and level the playing field out after this game has been released for a year, and help with some of the "experience shock" found in most FPS and MMO's that have been running longer than a year, because let us be honest, a combo of the two could be brutal on new players.

With that said, I do not see a need for NH/UA beyond a simulator, and I hope the Devs stick to their guns and do not implement NH/UA as part of the normal.

NOTE: do not take this as a close-minded personal attack, simply trying to explain why I, and why I am sure others, feel this way. Just remember, you can please some of the people most of the time, and most of the people some of the time, but not both.