63 replies to this topic

[Halfinax]

Aegis Kleais™, on 11 April 2012 - 06:34 AM, said:

Wow wow wow. Does it really need to even be said that of course this is nothing more than assumption. An estimate on what YOU'D PERSONALLY like to see vs. what (cannot due to it not being out) IS happening in the game?

I'm just asking for an opinion and what averages you'd expect to see. Is that really so hard to come up with?

lol. It's almost as if you think that I think that someone's random subjective opinion is to be taken as law on how the game will end up. Couldn't be any further from the truth. If you don't care to make assumptions, that's one thing; since the game isn't out, it goes without saying that without finite information on the game, it's all we really have to go on.

Then perhaps this belonged in General Discussion rather than suggestions. By putting it in suggestions you implied that you felt the devs should be attempting to make the game so that these probabilities should be coded to be absolute. His point was that there are too many factors to come up with any set percentage given player skill level changing over time. I agree with him completely. These things for the most part should be determined by player skill, and therefore shouldn't be something the devs build event probabilities for.

[Aegis Kleais]

Halfinax, on 11 April 2012 - 08:15 AM, said:

Then perhaps this belonged in General Discussion rather than suggestions. By putting it in suggestions you implied that you felt the devs should be attempting to make the game so that these probabilities should be coded to be absolute. His point was that there are too many factors to come up with any set percentage given player skill level changing over time. I agree with him completely. These things for the most part should be determined by player skill, and therefore shouldn't be something the devs build event probabilities for.

Sorry but under his logic (and by your agreement, your logic as well) if we were not to discuss anything that is an assumption simply because the game is not out yet, then you might as well wipe the GENERAL DISCUSSION forum out completely. And yes, it sounds absurd because the logic of "I won't do what was asked" and "How can you give averages on a game that doesn't exist" are as equally daffy.

If it was wrong of me in assuming that people would automatically know that we had to MAKE assumptions since the game was not out yet, and that this was common knowledge, then that is rightly my fault.

Edited by Aegis Kleaisâ„¢, 11 April 2012 - 08:27 AM.

[wwiiogre]

Well thought out questions Aegis and a good exploration of concepts very familiar to folks steeped in BattleTech lore. As more of a TT player than a pc player (yet I have played all the PC and computer games to date) I understood what you were asking and answered accordingly knowing full well that this was speculation since the game is not out yet.

Still think ammo explosions due to crits should follow the table top level three rules where it would be less than 1 in 400 chance, since as has been said there were known ways to exploit the chance to cause crits and therefore quickly cause an ammo explosion. We could do it easily in tabletop with ammo heavy mechs by hitting them with lots of missiles such that you were just trolling for random crits with the amount of hits caused as opposed to actually coring the mech. This lead to the death of many Phoenix Hawks and Shadow Hawks. My favorite tactic was to use and AC2 carrier and just splatter mechs from ranges they could not return fire. And just go crit hunting hoping to ammo explode them before they could even be part of the battle. The same was done to vehicles, we would use super long range fire and hope to get a lucky crit before they could hit us. But, credit to the DM he did it right back to us so we used cover and movement, etc to avoid being targeted at extreme ranges. So cat and mouse trying to avoid crits.

Hopefully PGI will have crits but have a good logical way they work and happen as opposed to a straight ability to randomly score a crit from any hit. I know its not TT canon but for a sim I feel it would need to work this way to avoid abuse as I stated above happened on TT. Just because you core a part of a mech does not necessarily mean you get a crit, in fact its less than a 50% chance it will happen. So even if you blew a torso off, you may not have scored a crit to the torso or even the arm that fell off or is hanging dangling.

so good OP and an interesting chat. I love the fact someone responded to your original question by trying not to answer. Makes no sense to me. Oh well, what do you do?

chris

[Halfinax]

Aegis Kleais™, on 11 April 2012 - 08:26 AM, said:

Sorry but under his logic (and by your agreement, your logic as well) if we were not to discuss anything that is an assumption simply because the game is not out yet, then you might as well wipe the GENERAL DISCUSSION forum out completely. And yes, it sounds absurd because the logic of "I won't do what was asked" and "How can you give averages on a game that doesn't exist" are as equally daffy.

If it was wrong of me in assuming that people would automatically know that we had to MAKE assumptions since the game was not out yet, and that this was common knowledge, then that is rightly my fault.

His primary argument was that it should be based on the player skill, since as he said the statistics will be emergent, and you dodged the point of this belonging in General Discussion. You are correct in that we can and should discuss these things, but the point is that they should not be purely probabilistic (which was his point, and if you use logic instead of seeing it as an attack against you that someone disagrees with your thought you would understand this). Move this to General Discussion since you seem to have admited that you aren't actually suggesting the devs do anything about this.

[Aegis Kleais]

Halfinax, on 11 April 2012 - 10:06 AM, said:

His primary argument was that it should be based on the player skill, since as he said the statistics will be emergent, and you dodged the point of this belonging in General Discussion. You are correct in that we can and should discuss these things, but the point is that they should not be purely probabilistic (which was his point, and if you use logic instead of seeing it as an attack against you that someone disagrees with your thought you would understand this). Move this to General Discussion since you seem to have admited that you aren't actually suggesting the devs do anything about this.

Yes, the thread is in the wrong one. I've actually made a request for a move before it was blown out of proportion. Mistakes happen. I made one to that effect; sorry.

But no, you WILL NOT change the original topic by trying to introduce some alternate. The original topic may NOT have stated that I was asking for someone's assumptions of how something was GOING to be, but that doesn't excuse the fact that he felt himself justified to go off on a tangent and then call to fact that the game wasn't released or even hint that I didn't know this.

[Johannes Falkner]

Engine Critical: <1/100
Head: Player aim dependent with 2/100 chance for cockpit crit. and effects from other crits. Death due to complete destruction of head 10/100
Ammo Critical: up to 20/100 for heavy ammo mechs
Leg: Player aim dependent with 15/100 critical chance on actuator to slow down the mech
Overheat: 0/100 if no ammo to explode. +5/100 per ammo

[Aegis Kleais]

it seems a lot of people have around the same estimate for Core breaches and legging. Interesting.

[Belisarius1]

Aegis Kleais™, on 11 April 2012 - 06:34 AM, said:

Wow wow wow. Does it really need to even be said that of course this is nothing more than assumption. An estimate on what YOU'D PERSONALLY like to see vs. what (cannot due to it not being out) IS happening in the game?

I'm just asking for an opinion and what averages you'd expect to see. Is that really so hard to come up with?

lol. It's almost as if you think that I think that someone's random subjective opinion is to be taken as law on how the game will end up. Couldn't be any further from the truth. If you don't care to make assumptions, that's one thing; since the game isn't out, it goes without saying that without finite information on the game, it's all we really have to go on.

Well, I mean, I feel like there is a useful question here that you're not asking. By creating a specific situation you can extract people's expectations about how things will work. Should leg hits have a random TAC chance to immobilise? That's an important question. How is stackpoling handled? That's another important question. Should an ace pilot be able to headshot a stationary 'mech at 200m every time? Important question, because you can infer direct mechanics from those answers. The OP question is so general that it's not informative. That's all.

People's opinions aren't law, but they might be useful information to someone, somewhere if there's something tangible to have an opinion on.

Edited by Belisarius†, 11 April 2012 - 03:39 PM.

[Aegis Kleais]

Belisarius†, on 11 April 2012 - 03:37 PM, said:

Well, I mean, I feel like there is a useful question here that you're not asking. By creating a specific situation you can extract people's expectations about how things will work. Should leg hits have a random TAC chance to immobilise? That's an important question. How is stackpoling handled? That's another important question. Should an ace pilot be able to headshot a stationary 'mech at 200m every time? Important question, because you can infer direct mechanics from those answers. The OP question is so general that it's not informative. That's all.

People's opinions aren't law, but they might be useful information to someone, somewhere if there's something tangible to have an opinion on.

One man's trash is another man's treasure. I would think that one's view of how important a topic is would be nothing more than a subjective opinion. We can leave it at "to each his own", but I'm just interested in knowing what the general community feels the averages of "rare" occurrences will be in the game.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

I would hope (despite being a TT player) that the effects of TACs would be a physics based model using the direction of the damage against the location of the components on the mech. Whether you will get "TACs" given that they rely on probability is another matter. It was one of the pro's of ballistics and missiles that I don't think was ever used in PC games. Which is a pity, 'cos I like the idea of a "Golden BB", especially from an AC2

[Pht]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 12 April 2012 - 09:00 AM, said:

I would hope (despite being a TT player) that the effects of TACs would be a physics based model using the direction of the damage against the location of the components on the mech.

why? Speaking of which, could we even validly say "we're using physics modeling for damage" when we don't even know the properties of BT armor? ... and how do we validly decide when to stop using physics... why not simulate down to the sub-atomic level?

It's an interesting idea but one that doesn't really seem to hold up to any sort of serious evaluation.

[CeeKay Boques]

I think its ok to invent numbers for things that are invented.

FF Armor is 3 Tribulons thick, while Reactive is 3 Tribulons with a coating of Catsheart.

[CeeKay Boques]

Pht, on 12 April 2012 - 10:18 AM, said:

why? Speaking of which, could we even validly say "we're using physics modeling for damage" when we don't even know the properties of BT armor? ... and how do we validly decide when to stop using physics... why not simulate down to the sub-atomic level?

It's an interesting idea but one that doesn't really seem to hold up to any sort of serious evaluation.

Well, because we enjoy it! http://mwomercs.com/...s-ferrofibrous/

[Pht]

Technoviking, on 12 April 2012 - 10:23 AM, said:

I think its ok to invent numbers for things that are invented.

... and when there are already numbers made for that invented stuff that describe how it behaves in a way that's useable by the game without who knows what kind of unintended conseqences caused by ... inventing more stuff?

Quote

FF Armor is 3 Tribulons thick, while Reactive is 3 Tribulons with a coating of Catsheart.

Actually, it's a few MM to a few CM thick.

Technoviking, on 12 April 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

Well, because we enjoy it! http://mwomercs.com/...s-ferrofibrous/

... and some people find enjoyment from beating themselves with whips that have glass in the ends too...

[Aegis Kleais]

You know, just by the posts made here online, you can easily tell which people you WOULD and which you WOULD NEVER invite to a party. A lotta Sheldons here. Lotta party-less Sheldons.

[wwiiogre]

Aegis,

the problem with the internet is you really can't tell what anyone is like. For some the internet allows them to be arse hats that in real life they are to timid to even speak. For some it allows them total honesty since they can say whatever they want with no consequences. For others it allows them to be sarcastic idiots, wait you can't tell if someone is being sarcastic on the internet only that they are idiots. Well you see what I am getting at. You just can't tell what anyone is like on the internet. All you can tell is if they are intellectually honest and debate in an open and honest way. I liked the original intent of the op. Keep on coming up with good ideas and things to look at Aegis. Since we have a few more months or less until the game launches and we can then pick apart an actual instance as opposed to guesses.

chris

[Aegis Kleais]

wwiiogre, on 12 April 2012 - 11:48 AM, said:

Aegis,

the problem with the internet is you really can't tell what anyone is like. For some the internet allows them to be arse hats that in real life they are to timid to even speak. For some it allows them total honesty since they can say whatever they want with no consequences. For others it allows them to be sarcastic idiots, wait you can't tell if someone is being sarcastic on the internet only that they are idiots. Well you see what I am getting at. You just can't tell what anyone is like on the internet. All you can tell is if they are intellectually honest and debate in an open and honest way. I liked the original intent of the op. Keep on coming up with good ideas and things to look at Aegis. Since we have a few more months or less until the game launches and we can then pick apart an actual instance as opposed to guesses.

chris

...
..
.

*writes wiiogre off the party list*

...
..
.

*...and adds him to the VIP list*

[wwiiogre]

lmao

chris

[Belisarius1]

Aegis Kleais™, on 12 April 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

You know, just by the posts made here online, you can easily tell which people you WOULD and which you WOULD NEVER invite to a party. A lotta Sheldons here. Lotta party-less Sheldons.

Look Aegis, at first I didn't understand what you were getting at and suggested related numbers that I thought it was possible to estimate. Eventually, you said that wasn't what you were looking for. I said I didn't think the numbers you were looking for could be estimated usefully, and said I'd leave the thread. It could have ended there. I'm still here because you kept on misrepresenting my position afterwards.

Aegis Kleais™, on 11 April 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

One man's trash is another man's treasure. I would think that one's view of how important a topic is would be nothing more than a subjective opinion. We can leave it at "to each his own", but I'm just interested in knowing what the general community feels the averages of "rare" occurrences will be in the game.

It could also have ended here. Again, I think you're missing the useful, applicable question, but it's your thread so that's fine and I didn't reply. I also agree it should be in General.

Except:

Aegis Kleais™, on 12 April 2012 - 10:52 AM, said:

You know, just by the posts made here online, you can easily tell which people you WOULD and which you WOULD NEVER invite to a party. A lotta Sheldons here. Lotta party-less Sheldons.

Now you're making undirected comments about mysterious "people" in a thread when you know those people are still reading. Wiiogre also. It doesn't even matter if that's directed solely at Pht and you actually think I'm the coolest dude in the universe. It's still pretty much akin to passive-aggressively posting on facebook about how annoyed you are with someone on your friends list.

Come on, we're all adults here, regardless of what the evil force known as the internet turns us into.

Edited by Belisarius†, 12 April 2012 - 02:55 PM.

[Aegis Kleais]

Belisarius, the fact that someone IMMEDIATELY before you got the joke and you didn't DOES prove a truth. But you need to adopt the previous poster's stance on my last message. It was a joke. I thought I had made it overwhelmingly obvious with the "removes from list, adds to VIP list" comment, but let me take this all one step further and pull out all the stops so the punchline isn't misinterpreted further.

It. Was. A. Joke.