|
Ranzear posted:Second glance you might think I give a poo poo. Ragesperging about MWO gives me the inspiration towards better things. I was wondering how long it would take for you to pull the puppetmaster defense  Please continue to post rants about why you don't care we're wrong about your terrible ideas while inserting more terrible ideas and using words and phrases in ways nobody uses them.
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:11 |
|
|
Looking stuff up again I did screw up my color chart in that previous post. Red-yellow is a bad idea.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 21:59
|
|
|
So I was thinking about getting back into the game not that clans are in, so I check out the thread and yall still fighting about ghost heat, Thats how much its hated its been the target of rage for over a year and its not going away.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
Crazyeyes24 posted:Edit: Oh man... that king crab looks awesome... Except for the feet. Holy poo poo those feet are bad. They look like they're on backwards and not in a good way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Its pretty close to the version he drew ages ago as fanart too. I think that Vanilla Crab looks even better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Except for the feet. Holy poo poo those feet are bad. They look like they're on backwards and not in a good way. The feet are an issue with a lot of the mechs already in the game, so they don't have a good track record in that department. Look at the Orion and its stupidly blocky cargo-loader feet, for instance. I think the mech with the best looking feet is the Dragon. Shame the mech they're attached to is so bad.. On an unrelated note, I tried the Menturion build today and my god but it's fun. Nothing like taking down a Dire Wolf because he was stupid enough to give you 3 full salvos at his rear armour!
ninjaiguana fucked around with this message at 22:13 on Sep 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Except for the feet. Holy poo poo those feet are bad. They look like they're on backwards and not in a good way. Yeah, the more I look at them the worse it gets. I like the over-armored front feel they have, but the lack of a forward toe makes it look wonky. I just really think the body and arms are freakin' slick. Butterfeet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Its pretty close to the version he drew ages ago as fanart too. The question is will Pgi release chrome colors so I can have this in vidya form: http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Rampage_(BW) Also we should probably stop taking lovely game so seriously. Game is f2p which is always poo poo. Based on a tabletop game by Jordan Weisman who always leaves enormous balance holes in his game designs which hosed up Arcane Legions that was so close to amazing. Also if we want to butthurt about bt games let's go back to Crescent Hawks Inception which was a great opening 2 hours followed by 6-8 pointless ones then one of the worst endgames in a game ever. Someone really should remake that and turn it into the mech RPG we always wanted. I mean some of the Front Missions are good but they still have a little bit too much JRPG and anime in em, ya know? (Westwood half assed a lot of games though. The TG16 DnD game was another one that clearly got shat out the door 9 months too early.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
They already got a render/concept art of the KC?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
ninjaiguana posted:On an unrelated note, I tried the Menturion build today and my god but it's fun. Nothing like taking down a Dire Wolf because he was stupid enough to give you 3 full salvos at his rear armour! I actually dropped mine down to 3xSRM4+Artemis. They seem to have an even tighter spread, they reload faster, ammo lasts longer (3 tons = 25 volleys) and I used the saved tonnage for extra DHS because it runs really hot if you get into a brawl. You lose about 12 points of damage per volley but IMO it works better in 'real world' conditions. The only real 'problem' with the build is that no 50-tonner can take being fired at by 6+ mechs for more than like 20 seconds, so as soon as you make a mistake with your positioning you are crippled or dead.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
Ranzear posted:There's a massive difference between all weapons hitting the same place at 90 meters, and all weapons hitting the same place at 900 meters. This seems to go right over Gwalthir's head. No, what's going over your head is that's a massively un-fun mechanic. If you can judge shot placement well enough to plug someone moving at 900 meters, grats you're a great shot. Putting things in the way of that other than being able to judge your lead time with whatever speed projectiles your guns are shooting sucks and is poo poo gameplay. That's not to say that fixed convergence settings don't have a place in a more sim-y game (War thunder comes to mind), but MWO is not that game. Ranzear posted:Reducing DHS capacity and total heatscale isn't an XML change, they only have 'pointvalue'. Uh that's exactly what it is. Heatsink items have a capacity and dissipation value. Ranzear posted:
Ranzear posted:
Sublime text 3 is acceptable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:29
|
|
|
i think they should add weapon dispersion, a tried and true mechanic that has been included in many successful first person and third person shooters
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
weapon dispersion as a mechanic is a good, abstract way of simulating the semi-chaotic nature of ballistics and the imperfections of weapon construction, while also being a valuable balancing tool
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Feindfeuer posted:Concept Art for the King Crab, screengrabbed from the latest Dev VLog, The appropiate name for this mech: Dr. Zoidberg. Gwaihir posted:That's not to say that fixed convergence settings don't have a place in a more sim-y game (War thunder comes to mind), but MWO is not that game. I'd also like to remind people that in instances in which you have to lead a target already result in offset convergence. Example: Spider moving at 120 kph in a 90° angle to you. Distance = 250m. You're now shooting with SRMs and/or AC/20s. Because you hate Spiders. Lets say that you will have to lead the target by more than it's mech length. The convergence of all weapons will be set to the distance to the object under your crosshair and thus your weapons will not hit the same spot IF you hit the Spider. Provided the object is a significantly farther away than the Spider. Unless they patched it out. But I guess that's rather unlikely. Last time I tried to play the game, UI 2.0 stopped me dead in my tracks. And probably killed some of my brain cells. Do you come from the thread, which has lost one topic, about which you might no longer talk. Something about food? vvvv Tank Boy Ken fucked around with this message at 23:04 on Sep 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
lasers as a direct damage tool are unrealistic due to the power output needed, and they should instead be used as electronic warfare devices that disrupt and blind other player's targeting systems with increasing effect at shorter ranges
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Feindfeuer posted:Concept Art for the King Crab, screengrabbed from the latest Dev VLog, That mech has cool hands and feet. I'd kinda like it to be red or blue, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:No, what's going over your head is that's a massively un-fun mechanic. If you can judge shot placement well enough to plug someone moving at 900 meters, grats you're a great shot. Putting things in the way of that other than being able to judge your lead time with whatever speed projectiles your guns are shooting sucks and is poo poo gameplay. Gwaihir posted:Uh that's exactly what it is. Heatsink items have a capacity and dissipation value. Gwaihir posted:Sublime text 3 is acceptable. Tank Boy Ken posted:Lets say that you will have to lead the target by more than it's mech length. The convergence of all weapons will be set to the distance to the object under your crosshair and thus your weapons will not hit the same spot IF you hit the Spider. Provided the object is a significantly farther away than the Spider. Ranzear fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Sep 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
Ranzear posted:No, it's one value in the XML that affects both. Lines 845 and 849. I'm bad at XML, so I may not understand, but what is going on on lines 963 - 966? It looks like they are separate, but similar numbers?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
OB_Juan posted:I'm bad at XML, so I may not understand, but what is going on on lines 963 - 966? It looks like they are separate, but similar numbers? Well gently caress me. I thought those were the engine sinks. What's the excuse for it not happening then? Ranzear fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Sep 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:20
|
|
|
OB_Juan posted:That mech has cool hands and feet. I'd kinda like it to be red or blue, though. You can have a blue one. It'll turn red after it gets boiled alive by lasers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
Ranzear posted:Well gently caress me. I thought those were the engine sinks. What's the excuse for it not happening then? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:26
|
|
|
Ranzear posted:Well gently caress me. I thought those were the engine sinks. What's the excuse for it not happening then? Let's rotate the board! In all honesty, I think pushing for minor XML changes (or CryEngine number fiddling) would be a lot easier to get done than asking for new mechanics. If the easy thing doesn't work, or still isn't fun, then we can see about more major things.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
Yea 845 has nothing to do with the heatsink item, that's the upgrade that changes your mech from one type to the other. There's nothing special in the files at all to differentiate engine sinks from any other type. As to the other thing, grats on joining the rest of the thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
A lot of interesting in-game behavior can be created just by fiddling with the numbers, but again, PGI's been loathe to try that even during the beta period when they would've had more freedom.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Ranzear posted:Well gently caress me. I thought those were the engine sinks. What's the excuse for it not happening then? Welcome to the Goon Hivemind, brother. We've been asking that question for two years. Edit: The answer to your question is: "PGI has never done any iterative testing and doesn't understand what any of their own numbers mean."
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
PoptartsNinja posted:Edit: The answer to your question is: "PGI has never done any iterative testing and doesn't understand what any of their own numbers mean." This is so sadly true.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
I guess only would code two values and keep them effectively the same. The Numberwang gripe has a lot more to do with 'hey, let's just turn PPC damage down two points, that'll fix it right?' that PGI has already tried. It's a joke about guessing a number, getting told it's wrong, and guessing again. It's largely unproductive in the face of heatscale and pinpoint, but fault me for assuming their methods so far were indicative of their actual capabilities?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
That's what people have been repeating for the last 5 pages. Just because PGI is incompetent at tuning and using the options at their disposal, does not mean that there needs to be some magic new systems to produce a fun balanced game. With the addition of MW:LL's UAC mechanic, you could 100% reproduce their entire weapons array, which was generally fantastic, with no additional coding required, only number changes. Health and other things would require a few code changes, because only internals are adjustable per mech at the moment, armor is tied to the actual armor item. So, for example, changing things up and adding something like modular armor, or some other method of making armor a real choice beyond "Max torsos, armor arms if they're good for shields otherwise skim there, armor legs up to 57 ish if possible." Like if you could actually meaningfully trade out some weapon load or speed for significantly more armor, that would be a cool and good thing to be able to do. Or port modular armor over almost verbatim, extra ton of armor on a section, in exchange for a maneuverability penalty (Arms = slower arm aiming, torsos = slower twisting, legs = slower turning) until it gets shot off. Etc. As far as "Things to help light mechs aside from more health" I would probably stick with making heavy and assaults less maneuverable with slower torso twist and turning bases. Luckily those are also controllable easily on a per mech bases in the mech definition files.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
Ranzear posted:The Numberwang gripe has a lot more to do with 'hey, let's just turn PPC damage down two points, that'll fix it right?' that PGI has already tried. It's a joke about guessing a number, getting told it's wrong, and guessing again. It's largely unproductive in the face of heatscale and pinpoint, but fault me for assuming their methods so far were indicative of their actual capabilities? PGI's attempts to balance so far are akin to a cat walking on the keyboard. They pick a dozen aspects of a weapon and change them all simultaneously. They're not looking at which weapons are taken most frequently and which weapons are ignored, and they're not asking "why" those weapons are and aren't being chosen, they're not looking at time-to-kill for `Mechs of different classes and weights. We're not asking them to pull a miracle cure out of the XML. We're asking PGI to stop being lazy and start paying attention to their own game and figuring out what their numbers really mean before they start sticking refrigerator magnets all over the reactor shielding. Edit: Aww. Just when we were making progress. 
PoptartsNinja fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Sep 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
PGI is dumb. loving stupid. There, I said it. 
Legit Businessman fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Sep 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
What? Is this a thing on the Sea?
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
Anders you are the worst
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:Anders you are the worst Who? Might I remind you I am the goon terrorist mastermind who orchestrated the downfall of an entire company on reddit.  Let's get back to discussing the interesting relationship between igp and PGI.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 02:00
|
|
|
I started watching the new dev vlog but then I fell asleep through the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
Drewjitsu posted:Who? Might I remind you I am the goon terrorist mastermind who orchestrated the downfall of an entire company on reddit. You, anders, are terrible at posting, and although you are slow, you do sometimes catch on eventually. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
Kylra posted:Red-Green is the large proportion of color blindness, with blue-yellow and then monochromacy being very rare and making up a much smaller portion. A red-yellow gradient or switch should be relatively fine for anyone that isn't in the very tiny group of monochromatic people. You'll have to provide different brightness contrast of some sort for monochromatic people anyway as it doesn't matter what colors you use. UX designers who aren't completely retarded avoid the issue completely by combining color-coding with either icons or watermarking so that you can use the intuitive colors (red = bad, green = good, etc) and still have a fallback for colorblind users. Also, multi-color gradients are generally poo poo - they're fine if you're using shades of the same color to show depth/lighting, but if you're transitioning from one primary color to another in a UI you've probably hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
I disagree. Anders is the best. Too bad he's not in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:You, anders, are terrible at posting, and although you are slow, you do sometimes catch on eventually. Shut up Gwaihir. Aping goon best practices from 2012 in the year of our Lord two thousand and fourteen is hopelessly incompetent at best and a insight into how this not going to get better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
OptimusWang posted:but if you're transitioning from one primary color to another in a UI you've probably hosed up. Unless I'm misunderstanding the claim you're making here 10+ years of RTS health bars say you're wrong on that and that's just the biggest example I can think of. There's tons of colour transitions in UI that work perfectly and have done for decades.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:11 |
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Unless I'm misunderstanding the claim you're making here 10+ years of RTS health bars say you're wrong on that and that's just the biggest example I can think of. There's tons of colour transitions in UI that work perfectly and have done for decades. Traffic lights have been around even longer and they're still poo poo for usability. Same colors, too  Just because "that's the way it's always been done!" doesn't mean it's a good practice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 21, 2014 02:31
|
|