46 replies to this topic

[RragnarR40k]

Sen, on 23 November 2012 - 04:41 AM, said:

It would be VERY sufficient to deal with these issues. You would effectively turn the game into the "race to the atlas".

I'm sorry, but I require speed to fill my role on the battlefield. 50MS ping or less, so don't complain at ME about hiding behind lag shield. Netcode. . well. . . Fix convergence and put collisions back in , you'll get lucky enough to consider the problem MOSTLY fixed ; )

But don't QQ when your assault mech can't hit me. it wasn't meant to. You want me off your rear armor, get your team to STEP UP AND DO THEIR JOB: Where's YOUR light pilot? Off somewhere chasing moonbeams? he should be peeling me off you. . and, YES, that is part of my job. . and I take my role VERY seriously.

ok, only because it's so much FUN . . . but I digress.

In other news, NERF ASSAULT ARMOR!!!! i can't kill them with 3 alphas to front CT!!! They shouldn't be able to TAKE that kind of punishment! a 10% reduction should do it. . . . .


(ya catchin' my point yet?)

Worst bunch of crap I've read in these forums, lightmechs are so difficult to hit as it is now and assault mechs are hopelessly outclassed most of the time when surrounded by a good lightmech user.

And exactly why should a lightmech be able to 3 shot an assault mechs armour??

There is absolutely no justification to this. Commandos running 152 kph, using 3x ssrm and a laser. hmmm sure that's fine...

Circling, circling, circling. Even if the Atlas scores a hit, 8 out of 10 times the hit doesn't even register due to the fact that the game cannot cope with the speed. So actually this suggestion is a pretty decent suggestion to fix a problem that makes Light mechs rather imba...

[Sen]

You either missed or did not read my entire post. Let me break it down for you:

1) The balance to the assault mech firepower is that it cannot move fast enough to target the scout mech. If it COULD, I would have no reason to play a light, as we'd be singled out as soft targets and blown to powder 30 seconds in.

2) speed itself is not causing the "hit/no hit" issue. Netcode is. THAT is what needs fixed, as well as convergence on ballistic weapons and knockdown re-implementation. As for the rest of it, I fail to see why *I* have to be penalized because *YOU* can't aim.

3) Sarcasm. Learn it, live it, know it. It makes as much sense to remove 10% of a light's speed as it does to remove 10% CT armor from an atlas. It is THE EXACT SAME ARGUMENT:

REMOVING MY SPEED IS LIKE REMOVING YOUR ARMOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It makes you AN EASY KILL!!!!!!!!!

You didn't spend all that money on an atlas to get cored 30 seconds into every match. . and I didn't spend all that time learning to pilot and honing my speed skills to get cored 30 seconds in either.

So you go ahead and call it "worst post evar" champ. I'm sure it's all netcode and latency causing all your issues, and you're a really crack shot and an elite pilot and all that Jazz and the game . . it *HAS* to be the game, right?

[Elder Thorn]

OP's idea is interesting.
I am not sure if i'd like it, but definatly interesting and maybe worth to give it a shot.

[RFMarine]

sounds like a good idea if netcode cant be fixed


at a game a while ago, matchmaking screwed up so we were fighting a large amount of commandos and ravens. And either I was seeing things or they were indeed walking slower (or maybe we went against a group that all decided to use smaller engines). I was landing hits with less difficulty on lights at close range.

Edited by RFMarine, 23 November 2012 - 05:28 AM.

[Ciel Noir]

mekabuser, on 22 November 2012 - 05:49 AM, said:

HIgh speed objects and cryengine 3 dont mix right?
SO , lets reduce all assets by 10 % or 20 and that would help alleviate the problem..

Of course we dont SAY we slowed everything down because nerds would rage, but it would vastly improve hit detection etc..
SO.. in the cockpit 50 kph is still 50 kph, but your just going 10% slower...

Would have to reduce lrm velocity by the same amount.
But i dont think this would be that difficult to implement, would , should have a large benefit for gameplay .
Thoughts?

You know, I'm okay with this. If it means better hit detection even with 200+ ping, I say go for it.

Inversely, we also need to think about decreasing the speed of torso turn and mech turning speed. I'm not really sure, but it would mean a whole revamp due to balancing issues. So, really it won't be an easy thing to do.

But, I would want PGI look into it at least. If the engine can't keep up then why not work around it.

[Kobura]

Even temporarily.

[Nightfangs]

mekabuser, on 22 November 2012 - 05:49 AM, said:

HIgh speed objects and cryengine 3 dont mix right?
SO , lets reduce all assets by 10 % or 20 and that would help alleviate the problem..

Of course we dont SAY we slowed everything down because nerds would rage, but it would vastly improve hit detection etc..
SO.. in the cockpit 50 kph is still 50 kph, but your just going 10% slower...

Would have to reduce lrm velocity by the same amount.
But i dont think this would be that difficult to implement, would , should have a large benefit for gameplay .
Thoughts?

I'd rather have the speed decrease and with that a working solution than wait and pray for a magical netcode fix.
I'm a PPC-fan, trust me, I know that situation.

[MaddMaxx]

And another side benefit. It would make the Maps seem Larger.

[Wolfways]

I agree with the OP.
MW is suposed to be a "tactical fps" and a "thinking person's shooter" (lol give me a break), yet it just feels like any other twitch shooter.
All trailers are made to make the game look great. In trailers mech combat is always slower than ingame.

And imo lights are not supposed to circle-strafe assaults; They are hit-and-run mechs. They're supposed to use their speed to avoid getting in the assaults LOS. If they fail they should expect to die.

[p4r4g0n]

Across the board speed reduction sounds like it could be a better approach to solving this long standing problem. Far as I can see, this would basically remove / reduce the lagshield while maintaining the relative speed between all objects.

Food for thought for the Devs.

[RragnarR40k]

I think this fix would actually work.

[Meatball095]

EVERYONE IS THINKING ABOUT THIS THE WRONG WAY.

You should not normallize an inadequacy. If the netcode is the problem, fix the netcode. Don't slow the game down. There are plenty of faster paced games out there that do not suffer from networking problems.

You fix the problem at its source, not paint it with some flowery looking bandage.

So if you want an example, look at what trying to 'fix' misplaced hitboxes due to collisions did to the game. We had this problem where hitboxes were misaligned because of collisions. So rather than fixing the hitboxes and solving the problem at its source, they removed collisions alltogether. This made new problems (e.g., now lights can circle strafe without worrying about falling over [making lights OP and causing further iterations on light balancing]) and left related problems unsolved (e.g., because they didn't fix the hitbox issues, they left lights with lag-shields, which is the problem we are currently dealing with.).

FIX THE NETCODE. DO NOT SLOW THE GAME DOWN. FIX THE PROBLEM AT ITS SOURCE.

Edited by Meatball095, 25 November 2012 - 08:11 AM.

[RFMarine]

Meatball095, on 25 November 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

EVERYONE IS THINKING ABOUT THIS THE WRONG WAY.

You should not normallize an inadequacy. If the netcode is the problem, fix the netcode. Don't slow the game down. There are plenty of faster paced games out there that do not suffer from networking problems.

You fix the problem at its source, not paint it with some flowery looking bandage.

So if you want an example, look at what trying to 'fix' misplaced hitboxes due to collisions did to the game. We had this problem where hitboxes were misaligned because of collisions. So rather than fixing the hitboxes and solving the problem at its source, they removed collisions alltogether. This made new problems (e.g., now lights can circle strafe without worrying about falling over [making lights OP and causing further iterations on light balancing]) and left related problems unsolved (e.g., because they didn't fix the hitbox issues, they left lights with lag-shields, which is the problem we are currently dealing with.).

FIX THE NETCODE. DO NOT SLOW THE GAME DOWN. FIX THE PROBLEM AT ITS SOURCE.

well what if for some reason the netcode cannot be fixed yet? the slowdown would be a better than nothing stopgap fix

Edited by RFMarine, 25 November 2012 - 08:12 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

RFMarine, on 25 November 2012 - 08:12 AM, said:

well what if for some reason the netcode cannot be fixed yet? the slowdown would be a better than nothing stopgap fix

I would say that then PGI has failed to make a decent online game. That's harsh, and I normally chuckle when people use words like FAIL or EPIC FAIL because of their over-dramatization - but this is supposed to be a multiplayer online game, If you can't get a grip on your net code and make it perform well enough to avoid lag most of the time, then your game just doesn't have a real chance.
You can only hope to hide the sad fact for long enough to still cash in a bit and maybe not make such a big loss (because Founders and all are great, but I doubt it alone already allowed them to break even).

[Meatball095]

RFMarine, on 25 November 2012 - 08:12 AM, said:

well what if for some reason the netcode cannot be fixed yet? the slowdown would be a better than nothing stopgap fix

If the netcode cannot be fixed, then sure, the only thing that would make sense is to investigate ways to hide the problem. I think it is way way way too premature to say that it cannot be fixed, however.

I also do not think a slower game speed should be implemented, for multiple reasons:

• The work involved in slowing down the game, gathering data on how the slower speed impacts game mechanics, issuing patches, rebalancing, repatching, rebalancing, etc... is probably not worth the time when that time could be spent cleaning up the netcode or implementing other needed game improvements. The work to slow the game down is likely unavoidable if attempted. Simple solutions such as reducing the tick rate (maybe?) might be able to circumvent a lot of rebalancing work, but might also not solve the problem completely.
  
• Eventually people will get used to the slower speed, which is when this stopgap becomes a permanent stopgap. The game has the right speed as is. If it will take five-and-a-half minutes to walk across map in a heavy instead of five currently, people are going to get bored thus would be more likely to quit the game entirely. This would lead to reduced revenue.
  
• Slowing the game down now does not guarentee they won't have to slow it down again in the future. What happens when a faster light mech (per the canon) is released? Do they slow the game down again, or not make the mech as fast as in canon? Slowing the game down now can limit game developments in the future. This is another reason why the problem should be fixed at it's source.

Again, I doubt the netcode problem is not fixable by fixing the netcode itself.

[RragnarR40k]

Anyone saying that this fix will just make them shooting ducks and blah blah, clearly haven't thought this through. The mechanics of the game are actually so that your turning speed and traverse speed is based on the speed of your engine. If they slow down the speed at which mechs move they will hopefully do the same to the rest of the stats on a mech. Since all mechs and engines already behave this way, it would and should not be a problem.

The slow mech will get 10% slower, and 10% slower at cornering - aiming and so on...

So basically it should mess very very little with the balancing of the game, while lending a pretty nice fix to the damned lag shield problem...

Edited by RragnarR40k, 25 November 2012 - 09:32 AM.

[mekabuser]

hmm. interesting to see the idea got a bit of traction.
tbh , im so confounded by the last few patches Idk what to think anymore regarding mwo.

[Meatball095]

RragnarR40k, on 25 November 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

Anyone saying that this fix will just make them shooting ducks and blah blah...

However, you can't slow the person doing the aiming: The limiting factor for how well I shoot my lasers is not my mechs turning speed right now. It's that I have trouble keeping my laser on my target through the whole burst.

So when you slow everything down except me, then I have more time to process my actions and aiming. I will therefore become more accurate in game.

I don't have a problem with this though, because it would be an even playing field for all.

[JustAStick]

MustrumRidcully, on 22 November 2012 - 01:45 PM, said:

How about making it turn-based?

I was always in the market for a turn-based shooter!

Please tell me you are being sarcastic. You probably are but I just want to make sure.

[CocoaJin]

I wonder of this will work.

They should find the fastest viable speed/rate the game can handle, set it as the cap, then rescale everything until that max rate equates to the corresponding max speed for the mechs to be used.

So if 50km/h was the mas speed that provides seemless gameplay and weapon tracking, but 150km/h is the fastest any mech would go in game. Shrink the mechs and all the trees, buildings, vehicles and other environmental models to 1/3 the height. So mechs that cover distances our current mechs cover at 50km/h would be moving at a scaled 150km/h. This would also make current maps feel way bigger.

Im not sure if it'll work, but meh, maybe its worth investigating. Nerd fact: Cockroaches run 200mph to scale if they were human sized. Making them the fastest land based animals to scale on the planet.

Edited by CocoaJin, 26 November 2012 - 01:58 AM.