14 replies to this topic

[Dudeman3k]

We all know existing issues with: current weapons, heat ratio's, Cannon of mech blue-prints, ect. but we all have to remember, it's their game (i honestly don't think they care about us).

Reason 1.

With their NERF/Buff mentality, it really seems more like a message to it's player base (what evers left of it, the smallest gaming community EVER) than a legitimate aim's to fix. They want to appeal to "us" like their listening, but in fact, they are only listening to themselves and the few "behind the scene" testers and take their opinions, and ONLY their opinions.

They saw a problem with "bowling" and "tripping"... so they removed it completely vs making it a weight issue (a message they were "listening"... or treating us like were ******** to make a point?) and most recently, They saw an issue with LRMS and nerfed the **** out them (I agree, they were pretty bad that day, but the issue was flight trajectory and % of missile hits, not the DMG)... so what did they do??? Nerfed all 3 vs, 2 of the 3..... and that is classic, inexperience we just witnessed at it's finest. (again, i refuse to believe their that dumb,so we'll just say its a message)

I know the forums get a lot of "whine whine whine cry cry cry" (according to the "veteran" players) but let me just remind you... if you want to be so extreme to ignore the "cries" and "whines" of 90% of the gaming community, you will be stuck playing 5v5 matches at best with how segregated this MW following is, compared to the rest of the (ever growing) F2P game publishing theme.... however I am one of the MW followers, and I HATE seeing an interpretation of one of MY favorite games (TT and video variations) get this much bad rep.

my two cents (or 2k c-bills) - when facing the concept of NERF'ing or BUFF'ing something, take some time to analyze the REAL problem first..... LRM's were fine before Artimis, so why in gods name did you change the flight path?! was that a legitimate way to set up LRM's to be the new bad guy over the gause?? just wondering.

[Elder Thorn]

well OP, take a look here: http://piranhagames.com/Games.html
i don't see another game there, that is comparable to MW:O, so it's not a surprise, that PGI might be 'inexperienced'.
Experience is achieved by mistakes.
Besides that, i think LRMs are ok now.
As for the bowling / tripping: They did not refuse to make it a weight class thing by removing it. They removed it because it was bugged, did you never notice those warping mechs, laying on the ground?
I agree, that it needs to be back, but i think you got some things wrong here

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Are you talking about Artemis LRMs? Because I'm still doing just fine.


However, PPCs, large AC velocities could still use some work.

[Kinilan]

Dudeman3k, on 09 November 2012 - 07:58 PM, said:

My win button isn't working any more and this upsets me.

[Jman5]

I don't see how you can make the claim they don't care. The amount of communication between the community and the development team is literally unprecedented. On top of that we have seen time and time again that they have made changes the community asked for. Remember how they delayed Open Beta shortly after announcing it because of the community's concern?

Balance is going to shift around quite a bit during beta. What's important is that they quickly address the most egregious problems like the post Artemis LRM.

With regards to the knock down problem: They took it out because it was bugged to hell so they could fix it up and re-introduce a working collision system. The knock down system was a placeholder.

Look, I really hate to play the mindless cheerleader because I see plenty of problems that need work and polish. But what I see coming from PGI is a development team that's making a real effort to communicate their intentions and gather feedback from us. So I'll give them respect because they sure as hell have earned it from where I'm standing.

[Frantic Pryde]

I think they are doing a fine job considering their resources. I personally feel like the game is the most balanced it's been since I started playing (first 10k invites). Granted, some things still need tuning but it's a work in progress. I'm glad I get to be here to play through it and help by giving the best feedback I can.

[LogicSol]

Dudeman3k, on 09 November 2012 - 07:58 PM, said:

They saw a problem with "bowling" and "tripping"... so they removed it completely vs making it a weight issue (a message they were "listening"... or treating us like were ******** to make a point?) and most recently,

Do you not understand the concept of "It's broken so we are removing it until the fixed version is done"?
PS: It WAS weight based, speed too. The main problem was the desyncing issue.

[shintakie]

LogicSol, on 09 November 2012 - 09:52 PM, said:

Do you not understand the concept of "It's broken so we are removing it until the fixed version is done"?
PS: It WAS weight based, speed too. The main problem was the desyncing issue.

My guess? No. No that person does not.

[Hellshiver]

roflmfao

Go check out Rift warriors to see Devs not listening to their player base. I will give the point that Heat needed adjustment and until the DHS tests, they didn't believe us.

As for the Knockdown mechanic, I miss it and don't miss it. As a light mech, I should NEVER trip a Catapult or any mech heavier then myself. I also shouldn't be triped at 10-20 meters. It needs fixing and without fixing it, the general public would crucify this game. Removal was a second best oprion, but this is a small company; best choice outside of fixing ASAP. Seeing as we want more then just Base D and calling for comunity warfare, only so many programers to go around.

For the LRM issue, do you think 3 out of 4 Trials mechs having LRMs was for LOLZ? They wanted to test LRMs and see what needed changing. Method behind the madness. LRMs were cried as "OMG OPOPOPOPOPOPOP and WTFPWNing machines" so they were checked. I remember a few posts crying about the low flight path of them. I see LRMs working like archery; Aim High to get the most range, low to get most power. IE, LRMs vs SRMs. Hate to think of Long Toms being put in, /shudder.

TL;DR: They listen and all is ok.

[Quxudica]

LogicSol, on 09 November 2012 - 09:52 PM, said:

Do you not understand the concept of "It's broken so we are removing it until the fixed version is done"?
PS: It WAS weight based, speed too. The main problem was the desyncing issue.

Not to mention the implementation was simply cheap and frustrating. Half the time you didn't know which mech you were even shooting until it was up and about to move again, I got cored by friendly fire more then a couple times in Closed Beta because of it.

The only "negative" thing about removing that elementary knock down system was that it removed a crutch and forces players to improve their aim. Well, that or use streaks. I play a light, a heavy and dabble with an assault, on all three I feel the game is much much better without that broken version of knockdowns.

[Mav Pryde]

As far as the knockdown... speaking as a person that came in after they got rid of it, I'm glad they did. I saw videos of matches with the knockdown in effect and it seems like it would be supremely annoying. Some of the matches seemed to devolve into a chase competition to ram and knock each other down so that their teammates can shoot in the face.

[Quxudica]

Mav Pryde, on 09 November 2012 - 10:09 PM, said:

As far as the knockdown... speaking as a person that came in after they got rid of it, I'm glad they did. I saw videos of matches with the knockdown in effect and it seems like it would be supremely annoying. Some of the matches seemed to devolve into a chase competition to ram and knock each other down so that their teammates can shoot in the face.

It was pretty awful. The Dragon in particular was terrible, it was bugged and could bowl over any other mech while almost never falling down itself. You could actually perma-trip an enemy mech with a Dragon. When two mechs would stand up they would also warp around, and you could think you were shooting the enemy but really be shooting your friend and not be able to tell until they were mobile again.

While it was occasionally funny to see a Jenner trip an atlas due to the wonky nature of the mechanic, it just did not in any way make for good gameplay. I'd honestly say it impeded good gameplay since it got people used to shooting at stationary targets.

Edited by Quxudica, 09 November 2012 - 10:15 PM.

[xRaeder]

I think the game is fine right now as far as mechanics goes and since last patch it has been pretty balanced. I don't see all LRM teams anymore.

People complain about the light mechs and the netcode issue that their fast moving causes. Well...

I have to say. If they add back the fall down in some manner (it was ridiculous in beta with Dragons bowling over everyone - I got tons of kills by repeatedly ramming and then shooting the enemy while down) ... but if they are going to add that back in then they shouldn't fix the netcode issue.

Otherwise it will break light Mechs. You either don't get knockdowns or you get a netcode fix. I don't think light mechs can handle both.

Anyway... The only problem I see with this game is a lack of scale. We must have 64 player battles and a server browser. I just can't see the game lasting that long unless the scale of play is increased.

MW:LL is a perfect example of this and should be emulated.

[Quxudica]

xRaeder, on 09 November 2012 - 10:44 PM, said:

I think the game is fine right now as far as mechanics goes and since last patch it has been pretty balanced. I don't see all LRM teams anymore.

People complain about the light mechs and the netcode issue that their fast moving causes. Well...

I have to say. If they add back the fall down in some manner (it was ridiculous in beta with Dragons bowling over everyone - I got tons of kills by repeatedly ramming and then shooting the enemy while down) ... but if they are going to add that back in then they shouldn't fix the netcode issue.

Otherwise it will break light Mechs. You either don't get knockdowns or you get a netcode fix. I don't think light mechs can handle both.

Anyway... The only problem I see with this game is a lack of scale. We must have 64 player battles and a server browser. I just can't see the game lasting that long unless the scale of play is increased.

MW:LL is a perfect example of this and should be emulated.

I seriously doubt we'd ever see matches that size. They are planning for 12v12 I believe at some point, but I think that's it.

[Tennex]

gregsolidus, on 09 November 2012 - 08:01 PM, said:

inb4 lock.

lol seriously. u can't criticize this game buddy, not if you want to play it

Edited by Tennex, 09 November 2012 - 10:54 PM.