1392 replies to this topic

[MadMadness]

Greyfyl, on 07 November 2012 - 07:31 PM, said:

And I think you are absolutely 100% wrong. YOU had experience with other MW games, you came in knowing there was a steep learning curve. MWO WILL NOT SURVIVE ON THE PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING PREMADES RIGHT NOW. Get it through your thick skulls - this game needs a large playerbase - the pugstomping that went on doing the first 2 weeks of open beta did nothing to HELP draw new players into the game, it gave them a reason to go find something else to fill their time.

By the way -- you can still do premades. Who cares if you can only do 4, that should still be way more than enough to tip the odds in your favor in every match anyways. Most of the people doing premades are really going to cry when they start getting their butts handed to them when it's 8v8. My guess is most of them will still do 4 mans to beat up on pugs even after 8v8 is implemented.

And I think you are also 100% wrong. Its been MANY years since I played a MW game. Yes, there was a learning curve for me in MWO and I got through it just fine. Its not like you faced a pre-made every match and on those games that you get your butt kicked should be a learning experience. Yes, I am a new player that stuck around despite your claim that pre-mades chase away new players. By the way I also brought in several new players that stayed by inviting friends. The fact of the matter is once you start to try to appease the entire general population then games become watered down and lame. (i.e. WoW and Diablo3) If new players can't take the time to learn the game before crying about getting slaughtered then they should find something else to do with their time. You simply cannot appease everyone.

And there is no excuse in the world that anyone can make up for their lack of in house testing.

[CutterWolf]

Wow I can't be the only one who notice these things.......

[Ramses2020]

Internet Robots. Serious bus- ah, crap. It's not a whine thread. Oh well. I'm only going to respond to game critical elements.

Karyu, on 07 November 2012 - 06:40 PM, said:

I’ll say this right off the bat. I’m in a corp, and we play as a group whenever possible. That may or may not lend bias to my views so far. After two days of playing we have only lost to being capped, not to being killed.

Matchmaker Phase 1 - We only drop as 4, and make no attempt to drop simultaneously with other groups of 4 in our corp, and only in 2-3 occasions were we aware that we were grouped with another group, and on several occasions confirmed that we had dropped against other groups, including those in our corp. The grouping aspect of it seems to be working properly; I can’t honestly say that it tends to set 2 groups of 4 against 8 PUGs, but I have noticed that very frequently everyone on our side have Founder’s packs and 4-6 of our opponents do not. All-in-all I am convinced this was a horrible mistake aimed at reducing PUG complaints until the final MM is developed. I personally notice almost no difference in the difficulty of play, in fact we’re not even communicating tactically on TS half the time and still mowing through people.

(hint hint, MM may not be the reason people are constantly complaining about being “PUGstomped”. Metrics showing scores of PRE v PUG compared to PUG v PUG and PRE v PRE matchups? I’d put money on over half of the losses to premades actually being against other PUGs.)

Bottom Line on Matchmaker – Current iteration was a waste of development time, nothing has changed and shame on you for listening to the loud minority in the first place.

Corp? You don't pilot your mech in a pod, do you?

Anyway, as it is now, MM uses mech size classes as the first priority, not lance size. The reason you're seeing one lance versing another so much now is because there are more than enough random PUGs to compensate for the different size of mechs. There would be nearly no way possible for an 8 man lance to go against another 8 man lance. You might have seen one or even two small (2-4 players) lances , but it was mostly PUG to ensure the mech sizes matched. There was rarely, if ever, an 8v8. Until there are enough players to satisfy a queue that would allow for like-sized lances as well as mech balance, what we have now will have to do. It is certainly better than it was prior.

Also, I'm pretty certain that 8 player lances make an even smaller vocal minority than those complaining about them.

Quote

LRM and Artemis FCS – Well, I like the Artemis. It’s hard to sort through its true effectiveness with the current LRM dynamics, which I am sure you’re working on. I play plenty of fire support, myself and my lance mates all agree it is ridiculously OP right now (mind you we are always on the winning side of them). I think the upgrade system is flawed. Currently it charges you space and tonnage to upgrade Streak SRMs you have equipped and it appears to have almost no effect on SRMs.

Bottom Line on LRM and Artemis FCS – Artemis is good, I hope the LRM behavior is a bug, seriously OP. I would suggest possibly changing the Artemis from a chassis upgrade to individual items. Example: In the weapons list simply add Artemis equipped LRMs and SRMs of each type that weight 1 ton/crit more and cost a little more. Artemis upgrades each individual launcher and some of us would like to run upgraded LRMs in conjunction with regular SRMs.

LRM behavior is perfectly fine; the fact that each missile is 2 damage is where the problem lies. When the missile pathing system was broken, it warranted 2 damage, but that was fixed ages ago. People have pleaded for several weeks to change it back to 1 where it belongs, but that just hasn't happened.

Quote

Double (1.4) Heat Sinks – Thank you Jesus. I think you guys made the right choice by dropping them to 140%. Before realizing that the engine HS weren’t upgrading I may have disagreed but now that that is fixed, I can imagine how ridiculous true DHS would have been. I can currently run all my old builds with DHS without adding a single heatsink other than the ones included in the engine. DHS is making extremely scary builds viable (6 SRM6 Catapult for example). Most LRM boats can fire completely non stop until they run out of ammo.

Bottom Line on DHS – 1.4 feels like a good spot. Assaults feel like they are at a disadvantage though due to 3 crits. Have you considered dropping them to 2 crits now?

1.4 is WAY too low, IMO. Furthermore, I don't know whether that number reflects heat dissipation values, heat capacity, or both. One thing for sure is that assault mechs are always better off using singles than "doubles".

[Dakota Mike]

As someone who PUGs, I personally have been having a lot more fun since this patch came out. I have found the matches to be a lot less one-sided than they were before. I only had one match in two hours where LRM boating was an issue. The rest were an even mix of wins and losses with very even / fun matches. This is a big shift where most of any given play period was my team getting smashed repeatedly.

I understand that pre-made team playing is a lot of fun and I'm sure the community aspect is great; however, for various reasons some of us can't or don't want to join them. Maybe someone has a computer in a public place and doesn't want to draw attention to themselves by talking out loud, or maybe some of us are waiting for in-game voice chat and faction/group setup; rather than using an outside program.

Just saying, there are reasons that people don't do pre-mades, and I know I'd still like to be able to play the game with out downloading teamspeak and without being part of a pre-made group.

Now I am excited to see how the faction / group aspect develops, but remember it is Beta right now, so there is a lot of content still to come.

[Caleb Lee]

Jyi, on 07 November 2012 - 09:17 AM, said:

Gauss, however, seems to get more arguments saying "it's ok, it's not that good". I don't think so. I don't think it has enough flaws currently. The only flaw I find with it that it's really hard to aim with 150+ ping, which is what I play with. Generally Gauss wouldn't be too bad as it currently is, but when you take 2 Gausses and put them in a mech, they become so much better. Headshot with that and it's pretty much an instant kill. A light mech, with full armor, gets cored in 2 shots. And it's to be expected there will be mechs capable of having 3 Gausses at some point. It's a simple, high damage weapon that DOES take skill to aim, but once mastered is just a bit too deadly.

Is Gauss a great weapon, you bet. It always has been and always will be in the BT/MW universe. Frankly, the AC 20 was supposed to core a light mech in one shot until they doubled values. The Jagermech and many others that can mount Gauss in the arms are really going to make your day then as you'll no longer have 'torso aiming limitations' that the CPLT-K2 has.

As a 'Gausspult' player (use C1/C4/K2 (energy configs) as well), I can definitely say they aren't OP anymore. I routinely have my Gauss rifles blown out of my torso. Sporting an XL engine, it also kills me sometimes too. This wasn't the case a couple patches back and prior to that it was OP as the weapons simply didn't get destroyed and there weren't any vulnerabilities.

I also pilot Jenners, and love them. I also never stop moving. If you get cored in a light mech it is either your fault, a very good shot that probably has a lot of luck unless you are doing less than 115 KPH, or you were the victim of Artemis LRMs which are just insane right now.

So back to the OP, yeah, I feel the Devs are chasing their tails and listening too much to the whiners on the forums. I also feel like some bugs are reintroduced that were squashed at one time or another during beta. This leads me to believe there's probably a lack of documentation and communication in the rush to get this game up to 'production' levels.

Right now I'm sure there stats are showing:

A) Lots of LRMs sporting Artemis - It's deadly... I'm spending half the match hiding or running for cover. I can't even harass LRM boats in my Jenner (which is supposed to be their counter btw...) because I will die if even a volley or two are launched and I'm not moving at 129+ with AMS and getting behind cover till they lose lock and interest.

-- As a caveat, I also spot for LRM boats on our team and I've watched Atlas's get demolished literally in seconds from only 2-3 volleys. I can't hardly get a kill anymore unless I purposefully drop lock, which I have problems doing as I want to win. It's also NOT fun as other than spotting for LRMs and communicating mech movements I can't do much until they've run out of ammo and are hurt.

SRMs - Artemis did tighten up the spread which is good, cause the Devs nerfed it to the point of uselessness. I loved playing my CPLT-C4 with 4 SRM 6. It was a deadly in close weapon that I could hold my own with any mech in the game once I got in range, excepting the Atlas as the Catapult after all is fragile. I don't know if players will start playing SRMs again with Artemis now. I need to give it a try... either way, the spread on SRMs was ridicoulous.

C) Streak SRM - They put in a stealth nerf and didn't mention it in this last patch, or it was unintentional. Prior to Tuesday both missiles would hit consistently. Now, I'm seeing one of the missile miss almost 60% of the time. It also doesn't target the upper torso (CT/LT/RT) with any consistency at all. I have to JJ and shoot DOWN on the mech to get that effect. If I'm lucky one missile depending on the angle will connect. The rest of the time the second missile will often go between legs even on other light mechs.

__ Streaks should go where the pilot aims, otherwise they should default to how they are now. This is a nerf and seriously undermines their effectiveness.

__ I also hope they reduced the KNOCK on Streaks, it was WAY too high for two missiles. An A1 pilot cycling STRK 2s could keep even a heavy mech from aiming with any accuracy at all.

D) AC 20 - Thank you for the heat reduction, that helps considering the reduction in DHS. However, as the king of the AC line they still lack a bit damage wise given the doubling of armor. It's TT values with a very slight reduction in heat and an extra round per ton, but I always drop it for a Gauss rifle because frankly it's inefficient in this iteration of Mechwarrior.

[Verminaard]

Yeah it's all a work in progress obviously. I've noticed many things I don't care for too much, but overall the maps are wonderful and I'm sure they'll make them "pretty" (More so) when the urgent features are in. So I'm not worrying about it myself, yet.

Forest colony: Yes the ship in forest colony is not believable, and I'd love to see some sort of long range communication center or perhaps something more related to the "colony" that's there. Right now it's rather small (nice. but small) and could use more fleshing out in the wide open expanses of the lake region. Making water deeper and maybe having a smaller tug boat half sunk would be ok, but the connection to the out of bounds big lake doesn't look reachable by a larger boat.

RiverCity: I love the billboard advertising MWO on one of the buildings! Would love to see it made more lifelike as stated above, right now its very grey and lacks any signs of a once thriving city, It looks like a sad little city. Either more color or make the buildings look like they've been destroyed awhile ago (ruins) perhaps?

FrozenCity: I must admit, it started off as my least favorite map way back when. But now it's my favorite one. It fits what I expect of a map, and honestly have nothing bad to say about it. I'm actually very happy with it. Fix the bugs, visual glitches, places you get stuck and maybe add snowstorms that build and dissipate during the match and it'd be perfect (to me).

Forest Colony Alternative: Haven't seen enough of all the changes to comment other than the bugs. Many visual/graphical bugs atm. Primarily the F4 grid where the ground looks like a base capture location due to the red square. The avalanche area made me sad i couldn't climb it with my mech, it kicks me down. JJ made it accessible, might be intended this way.

Caustic Valley: I like it, I'm sure I'll find issues in time, but for now It's good. Mostly minor tweaks and changes needed.


Map themes I'd love to see in the future:

A military base (like Mw4's opening trailer)
Underground complex
Rolling Hills
Nightfight (anywhere! add day/night mode to each map maybe?)
Canyons (an area with canyons carved into it, a bit like MW2 intro) but running the center of the map, allowing fighting within and above)
Cityfight (just like the original trailer for MW"5", many big buildings and make it look like downtown of a major city.)

Game modes I'd love (not necessarily easy to implement):

Base assault (one team defends other assaults; Landing from orbital dropship maybe?)
Headhunt (Find an eliminate the enemy's "commander mech [guy who took command]" before they get yours.)
Extraction (uneven teams, team A (lance?) must get from point A-Z, Team B (Multiple lances) must find and kill them.
Sabotage (one team has to eliminate a target (mech, building, etc), but has less players than the defenders)
Capture the Flag (Could be a fun re-spawn mode for those that want that.)


Sorry for the typos Im dead tired, going to sleep now.
~Verm

Edited by Verminaard, 07 November 2012 - 08:26 PM.

[T3N5H1]

Yeah,
the answer from the devs i think is like this one:
that's kinda response you get from parents, when you tell them, that their baby/little boy or girl is
a underhand and unfair person.
Its like: Woohoo, that can't be! What are you telling us! It is such a nice person.

But you know, with this beahvior you don't want to spend yout time with this person.

Edited by T3N5H1, 07 November 2012 - 09:28 PM.

[AceTimberwolf]

Dakota Mike, on 07 November 2012 - 08:13 PM, said:

As someone who PUGs, I personally have been having a lot more fun since this patch came out. I have found the matches to be a lot less one-sided than they were before. I only had one match in two hours where LRM boating was an issue. The rest were an even mix of wins and losses with very even / fun matches. This is a big shift where most of any given play period was my team getting smashed repeatedly.

I understand that pre-made team playing is a lot of fun and I'm sure the community aspect is great; however, for various reasons some of us can't or don't want to join them. Maybe someone has a computer in a public place and doesn't want to draw attention to themselves by talking out loud, or maybe some of us are waiting for in-game voice chat and faction/group setup; rather than using an outside program.

Just saying, there are reasons that people don't do pre-mades, and I know I'd still like to be able to play the game with out downloading teamspeak and without being part of a pre-made group.

Now I am excited to see how the faction / group aspect develops, but remember it is Beta right now, so there is a lot of content still to come.

u can still teamspeak and not talk. just listening is enough. seems like an excuse.

[Belkor]

Ramses2020, on 07 November 2012 - 08:02 PM, said:

Also, I'm pretty certain that 8 player lances make an even smaller vocal minority than those complaining about them.

That's the truth.

Karyu, on 07 November 2012 - 06:40 PM, said:

I’ll say this right off the bat. I’m in a corp, and we play as a group whenever possible. That may or may not lend bias to my views so far. After two days of playing we have only lost to being capped, not to being killed.

I’d put money on over half of the losses to premades actually being against other PUGs.

Two very contradictory statements you've made there. Are you actually trying to claim that 8 man premades don't hold a significant advantage over pugs? Really? Besides from organization, premades have the benefit of cherry picking experienced players with well equipped mechs. This alone allows premades to easily stomp over pugs. The 8 man premades should never be matched with pugs if this game is to succeed.

Edited by Belkor, 07 November 2012 - 09:51 PM.

[StandingCow]

Good post OP.

[Raven-kell]

someone lock this lame thread!

[riverslq]

But we have 3.
Same as yesterday.

Wonder if the patch had anything to do with it.

[Kibble]

Either not dedicated and willing to deal with the issues or attempting to send a message to PGI.....I CAN'T TELL!

[Red Five]

If you think thats bad just think of all the new players that have writin this game off as a failure before its even out of the gate yet =/. GL to your clan, things usually get worse but they will get better! (I hope)

[h00n]

NoxMorbis, on 07 November 2012 - 03:23 AM, said:

Wow, you guys really outdid yourselves. 75% of our merc unit is now not playing, including myself. You have succeeded in making this game boring beyond belief.

(1) 4 man premades. Sounds great.. One problem: Now we can't play with a full group of our teamates (which is always more fun than 4) and without more mechs, we can't run tactically advanced manuevers, such as timed flanking. It's boring now. Like mind numbingly boring.

(2) Adding to bordom is the missle factor. Nothing to do except hide behind structures so you don't die in 10 seconds. (Almost impossible to counter that with a 4 man team.)

(3) Limited tactics, no interaction with more than 4 people at a time, misslels that pin a whole group down for nearly the entire game. I think maps have a lot to do with this though and that can change, and that LRMs don't really have an equal couter to them, such as Long Tom artillery of some sort. That would be kinda fun lobbing artilery shells at LRM boats. No need to nerf LRMs thugh, just counter something.

(4) Conclusion: Good bye MWO. Was fun while it lasted. I'll be checking back now and again, but it was continually getting more and more boring with the "balance" you put in. I hope your pugs can support your efforts because that's who you're playing to. When I'm forced to play with strangers, that's not gonna go with me.

And since it's incredibly hard to earn cbills, even for a founder, I doubt that's gonna happen, especially when you get what, 1200MC for 10 bucks or something like that? I mean that's fine for a game you realy want to play. Curently what you have a is a really boring, much less team-like game, and more of a Counter Strike, casual game.

meh

Sounds like your ***** hurts.

also

>Counter-strike
>Casual

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH oh you're serious

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

http://www.cevo.com/...on/competitors/
http://www.teamwarfa...Season+1+-+Open
http://www.teamwarfa...AGO%3A+NA+-+5v5

Yep, real casual there, scrub.

[riverslq]

I will say, if the game fails its not because the players didn't try.

[CPUuser123]

i havent logged in since the patch. i have been too busy scratching my head...

[klez]

You people are ridiculous whiners and your complaining isn't helping a game you claim to enjoy.

Shut up.

[Fooooo]

AceTimberwolf, on 07 November 2012 - 09:47 PM, said:

u can still teamspeak and not talk. just listening is enough. seems like an excuse.

People can also say.....

You can just wait 2 weeks for 8 mans to come back. Just reading posts from the devs is enough.

Seems like an excuse to me.






Secondly to the few people sprouting doom and gloom...........

If all these 8 man squads / clans etc are stopping playing and saying it will be the end of MWO, then why was it common knowledge that 8 man premades were only in 1-10% of games or whatever ?

Wouldnt that mean that only a small % of the players are leaving for something that will return in around 2 weeks ? Leaves a pretty big chunk of other players left imo....


Just seems like a silly argument to me thats all.... not trying to be offensive or anything here.....

[riverslq]

klez, on 07 November 2012 - 10:18 PM, said:

You people are ridiculous whiners and your complaining isn't helping a game you claim to enjoy.

Shut up.

apparently Kleenex, I mean Klez hasn't been able to log in since Tuesday.