Jump to content

"warning Targeted"

v1.2.190

55 replies to this topic

Poll: Targeted Warnings? (101 member(s) have cast votes)

Keep it or something else?

  1. Keep it - I can't get enough of these unbalanced, skill destroying design fails! (17 votes [16.83%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 16.83%

  2. Lose it, I am a psychic God of all Mechs (39 votes [38.61%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 38.61%

  3. Turn it into a module and add much needed late game depth (43 votes [42.57%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 42.57%

  4. Frrrrrrrrrt I made a puddle with my pee pee (2 votes [1.98%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 1.98%

Vote

#21 Cest7

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,781 posts
  • LocationMaple Ditch

Posted 20 February 2013 - 01:31 AM

I can't decide if I want it gone, or for it to also tell me when I've broken the enemies target and come with a Kill switch

Edited by Cest7, 20 February 2013 - 01:31 AM.


#22 Snib

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 689 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 01:32 AM

The worst part is that the "warning targeted" goes off each time one of the ghost brackets appears (i.e. when you're not even targeted).

#23 PPO Kuro

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 300 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 20 February 2013 - 01:53 AM

I don't mind this feature. I even like it, but then I'm not a scout pilot. :lol:

But I can understand some ppl not liking it. Now if they could only give me a warning whenever I'm taged or Narced.....

#24 Inertiaman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 865 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:06 AM

Also - to anyone that called people in the ECM thread moaners/whiners/bads/etc - this is why noone sat back quietly and trust in PGI to design ewar properly. Since ECM landed, faith in the design of this game isn't exactly at an all time high to anyone with even just a rudimentary feel for balance.

#25 ohtochooseaname

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 440 posts
  • LocationSan Jose, CA

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:21 AM

It would be nice if it only went off when someone had a lock, and not just every time they targeted you. The lock has some active (with artemis anyway) sensors, so it makes some small amount of sense.

#26 Lupin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 955 posts
  • LocationKent, UK.

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:21 AM

I personally do not like it.
While does have a use I think wording might need work, more likely to make players paranoid.

REAL radar would be better. Or at the very least sensor on Mech should be 360 line of sight given we already have a module for 360 target lock.

#27 Misfit73

    Member

  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 05:07 AM

It needs to go, completely without replacement.

#28 Max Liao

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 695 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationCrimson, Canopus IV

Posted 20 February 2013 - 05:11 AM

Remove it or module it, I don't care. (I wouldn't buy that module, but if someone finds it useful, why not let them?)

#29 MilitantMonk

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 378 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis, MN

Posted 20 February 2013 - 05:17 AM

So much for ambushing mechs in dark corners. Also as a scout I'll never be jumped again! At least until a weird sort of arms race/meta game with scouts occurs where we don't target things anymore.

#30 Inertiaman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 865 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 05:32 AM

View PostMax Liao, on 20 February 2013 - 05:11 AM, said:

Remove it or module it, I don't care. (I wouldn't buy that module, but if someone finds it useful, why not let them?)

The module suggestion was really because I don't like the idea of removing content/features completely when they can just be moved up the progression curve to a point where they're something to aspire to.

#31 Max Liao

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 695 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationCrimson, Canopus IV

Posted 20 February 2013 - 05:42 AM

View PostInertiaman, on 20 February 2013 - 05:32 AM, said:

The module suggestion was really because I don't like the idea of removing content/features completely when they can just be moved up the progression curve to a point where they're something to aspire to.

And I think it was a good idea. ;)

#32 Aegic

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • LocationHouston

Posted 20 February 2013 - 05:46 AM

I would rather have it gone. However, I hate when people make polls the way you did. I think you should make the poll more respectful, more professional, and not biased.

#33 Inertiaman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 865 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:06 AM

Positive, negative, alternative and control. What's the problem? ;)

#34 StalaggtIKE

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 2,304 posts
  • LocationGeorgia, USA

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:14 AM

I would like to see this feature removed and given to BAP only.

#35 Hammer Hands

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 89 posts
  • LocationMoscow, Ru

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:25 AM

It's getting to the point where I don't target anyone any more because I love to play sneaky fast mechs. Now the only time I purposely target someone is after I have fired my first volley into their back. If they can't be bothered to keep their head on a swivel and keep situational awareness that is the player's fault and something good players should be able to exploit. The new voice has taken a huge amount of the concept of fun out of the game at this point for medium and light mech players where stealth and concealment are biggest benefit.

Get rid of the voice, or make it a module, I would easily pay 6 mil credits to drop this module into my scout mechs and my LRS mechs.

#36 Lyrik

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 568 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:26 AM

Yep, give it to Bap :-)

#37 Nekomimi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 300 posts
  • LocationOklahoma

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:35 AM

You may want to Change the poll options to just Keep it, Lose it, Turn it into a module. That way it's more likely to be taken seriously.

I voted for ditching it, because now you cant target anybody. AND it took us forever to get randoms to start pressing R to start with, now you just threw out 6 months of training...

Edited by Nekomimi, 20 February 2013 - 06:39 AM.


#38 Inertiaman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 865 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:39 AM

I really couldn't give a Foxtrot about being taken seriously.

#39 Hylius

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hunter
  • The Hunter
  • 265 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 20 February 2013 - 07:11 AM

At worst, it's an annoyance in battle. At best, it completely destroys any ambush attempts. It needs to go.

#40 JadePanther

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 967 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 07:22 AM

View PostStalaggtIKE, on 20 February 2013 - 06:14 AM, said:

I would like to see this feature removed and given to BAP only.


this would give BAP some real incentive other than alpine peaks or streakers.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users