20 replies to this topic

[Chou Senwan]

If a mech has had no piloting input for at least 30 seconds, allow a spectator who is watching that mech to click an option of "Take control."

The pilot of the AFK mech then gets a prompt that flashes: "Retain control? Press 9 to retain control in 5 . . . 4 . . ."

If the pilot doesn't, he goes into spectate mode for his own mech, and the spectator takes over. This lets disconns and AFKers have at least some possibility of helping their team.

[boobooo42]

Chou Senwan, on 18 February 2013 - 09:54 PM, said:

If a mech has had no piloting input for at least 30 seconds, allow a spectator who is watching that mech to click an option of "Take control."

The pilot of the AFK mech then gets a prompt that flashes: "Retain control? Press 9 to retain control in 5 . . . 4 . . ."

If the pilot doesn't, he goes into spectate mode for his own mech, and the spectator takes over. This lets disconns and AFKers have at least some possibility of helping their team.

You are suggesting that another player be able to control my character? Bold move, it's never been done before, and doubt it ever will be.

[Chou Senwan]

The flavor is, "Oh no, Joe fell unconscious. Well, my mech's toast. I'll climb into his, shove him to the side, and see if I can make a difference!"

What's the worst they could do to your stats? Team kill?

[Elder Thorn]

Chou Senwan, on 18 February 2013 - 10:29 PM, said:

The flavor is, "Oh no, Joe fell unconscious. Well, my mech's toast. I'll climb into his, shove him to the side, and see if I can make a difference!"

What's the worst they could do to your stats? Team kill?

implying the stats would not count for the player taking control.

I think the idea isn't THAT bad at all. It just has to be implemented properly and not abusable for griefing and that kind of stuff

[Valorcalls]

I believe the OP stated that the mech would have to have no piloting input for 30 seconds. IE, NO weapons fire, NO speed changes, NO torso movement, NO targeting.

Frankly, if there is ever a time an active player spends 30 seconds of a game not doing one of those 4 things... They probably are afk.

+1 OP.

[Elder Thorn]

Valorcalls, on 18 February 2013 - 10:38 PM, said:

I believe the OP stated that the mech would have to have no piloting input for 30 seconds. IE, NO weapons fire, NO speed changes, NO torso movement, NO targeting.

Frankly, if there is ever a time an active player spends 30 seconds of a game not doing one of those 4 things... They probably are afk.

+1 OP.

sure. But let's assume this (yeah i admit, this will happen very rarely, if at all...):
Playing a game of concquest, Forest Colony. You are the last guy allive of your team, the enemy has 2 guys left. You saw them heading for epsilon and oyu assume they don't know you are close to epsilon yourself. You hide inside that cave and shut down, so they won't be able to autolock you (yeah ok, until they have BAP). As soon as they start capping and look arround, you power up, walk out of the cave and kill them with shots to the back before they know whats happening.

I know, highly hypothetical (is that even the right word? damn), but wouldn't it be a shame if a plan liek that got ruined by a function like this, because some derpster is like "omg, that coward is hiding and refuses to fight, i shall show him how a real clanner fights, herpaderp - assuming direct control, you will die, shepard!"

edit: ah yes, there was this thing with a key to prevent someone taking over your mech, but that would mean, that you could actually see and use your UI while shut down, thats what i meant with properly implemented (hell, is 'properly' even right? i guess you get what i mean)

Edited by Elder Thorn, 18 February 2013 - 10:49 PM.

[Valorcalls]

Yeah. a button to prevent override, unlike the poor collector ******** getting assuming controlled (yes i get the reference).

I would use the 7 button. its not used for a weapons group and is reachable easily enough by my left hand from a wasd standpoint.

[blinkin]

this has been suggested before and i still think this is a supremely bad idea.

i don't want people making their own afk squads just so they can have 3 extra lives.

[Valorcalls]

blinkin, on 18 February 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:

i don't want people making their own afk squads just so they can have 3 extra lives.

Um... If you do that your fighting 8v5. I don't know about you, but i personally have never lost when fighting in the 8 in that...

That would also be why we need a "report player" ability.

3 afkers? report them, making the match null for your team in relation to damages once R&R are returned.

[blinkin]

Valorcalls, on 18 February 2013 - 11:16 PM, said:

Um... If you do that your fighting 8v5. I don't know about you, but i personally have never lost when fighting in the 8 in that...

That would also be why we need a "report player" ability.

3 afkers? report them, making the match null for your team in relation to damages once R&R are returned.

i am talking about being on the same team as someone who pulls that. yeah the winners get a cheap victory and the 4 other players on the losing team get screwed.

[Valorcalls]

Yes, but also note that ANYONE on the team can take over those 3 extra mechs. not just the 4 dropper.

Speaking of which. There needs to be a setting to make it so PuGs are PuGs and Groups are Groups.

I'm tired of dropping into matches vs 2 4 man sync drops and getting roflstomped (losing without killing anyone on the other team).

But... I sure do love doing that when I'm in a group. In all, its just a pain in the ***.

[Rawrshuga]

Hmm ... this seems like one of those ideas that ends up creating more problems than it solves.

First off, implementing such a system would be quite complicated. This is not a single player game where you take over another bot. You're talking about switching input control over to another IP. Second, implement this and there will be nothing stopping a hacker from hijacking the system, seizing control of your mech and proceeding to TK your entire team and giving you a bad rep and a c-bill loss. For that matter nothing stopping a hacker from taking control of your entire team and making standstill, shoot each other, etc.

So maybe let an A.I. control it? Then they'd have to program A.I., pathing, etc, for what? Because some people get phonecalls, angry spouses/parents, etc.?

Personally I think it's better for us to just live with the fact that sometimes people get called away from the game to deal with life, and that some people are inconsiderate a-holes who wanna try to farm c-bills/XP, and we learn to put up with life's little bothersome problems.

[blinkin]

Rawrshuga, on 19 February 2013 - 12:27 AM, said:

Hmm ... this seems like one of those ideas that ends up creating more problems than it solves.

First off, implementing such a system would be quite complicated. This is not a single player game where you take over another bot. You're talking about switching input control over to another IP. Second, implement this and there will be nothing stopping a hacker from hijacking the system, seizing control of your mech and proceeding to TK your entire team and giving you a bad rep and a c-bill loss. For that matter nothing stopping a hacker from taking control of your entire team and making standstill, shoot each other, etc.

So maybe let an A.I. control it? Then they'd have to program A.I., pathing, etc, for what? Because some people get phonecalls, angry spouses/parents, etc.?

Personally I think it's better for us to just live with the fact that sometimes people get called away from the game to deal with life, and that some people are inconsiderate a-holes who wanna try to farm c-bills/XP, and we learn to put up with life's little bothersome problems.

i think the hacking thing is very unlikely as long as they pay any attention when they design the system, but i agree with the rest of what you said.

[Stuii OCAU]

I like this idea, it can help even out disconnects and misbalanced teams.

[blinkin]

an evil force has swept across the community. it has stripped many players of their reason.

i foresee many long and brutal battles before order is restored.

[DocBach]

they already got their mech blowed up, why would I want them driving mine if I got DC'd?

[DeadlyNerd]

DocBach, on 19 February 2013 - 01:03 AM, said:

they already got their mech blowed up, why would I want them driving mine if I got DC'd?

maybe because there's no r&r and you wont get a death, but they will?
Apart from having that feeling when your best friend is screwing your girlfriend, it's rather logical.

[Elder Thorn]

Rawrshuga, on 19 February 2013 - 12:27 AM, said:

Hmm ... this seems like one of those ideas that ends up creating more problems than it solves.

First off, implementing such a system would be quite complicated. This is not a single player game where you take over another bot. You're talking about switching input control over to another IP. Second, implement this and there will be nothing stopping a hacker from hijacking the system, seizing control of your mech and proceeding to TK your entire team and giving you a bad rep and a c-bill loss. For that matter nothing stopping a hacker from taking control of your entire team and making standstill, shoot each other, etc.

So maybe let an A.I. control it? Then they'd have to program A.I., pathing, etc, for what? Because some people get phonecalls, angry spouses/parents, etc.?

Personally I think it's better for us to just live with the fact that sometimes people get called away from the game to deal with life, and that some people are inconsiderate a-holes who wanna try to farm c-bills/XP, and we learn to put up with life's little bothersome problems.

hm, you are probably right.
/thread

[sycocys]

If the matches were 30+ minutes long on average I'd consider supporting something like this, of if it wasn't entirely possible to outplay 8 players with 6 (sometimes even 5 if your team is really good at focus firing and gets some fast kills).

[blinkin]

sycocys, on 19 February 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

If the matches were 30+ minutes long on average I'd consider supporting something like this, of if it wasn't entirely possible to outplay 8 players with 6 (sometimes even 5 if your team is really good at focus firing and gets some fast kills).

i have won a 5 on 8 match before. it is definitely not easy, but it is feasable.