HAWKEN servers are up and our latest minor update is live!
Forgot Password? SUPPORT REDEEM CODE

Jump to content


Organizing Internals: Passive and Active


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Xacius

Xacius

    The Saltan

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,889 posts
  • LocationOther games, waiting for dev beacon

Posted October 18 2013 - 06:39 PM

Before more updates and items are introduced to Hawken, I want to gauge the community's interpretation on the new internals system.  During its "rework," we were told that the new internals system would "give pilots the ability to do different things," rather than merely modifying stat pools.  

By the time the patch rolled around, there were a total of 2 new internals that gave us the ability to "do different things."  These internals were the Air Dodge and Air 180°

These "active" internals make up less than 10% of the list.  Every other internal simply modifies stats.  The Advanced Repair kit gives you more armor with health orbs, the Reconstructor heals you over time based on your combat state, the extractor increases the rate at which you absorb orbs, Fuel Converter gives you fuel based on damage received, etc...

In the future, we'll most likely be seeing new internals that give us neat abilities like the air dodge.  The community has already made some wonderful suggestions, and the devs have taken note of these suggestions.  

I like the % modifications, don't get me wrong, but I feel that some of them are too strong to the point of almost being necessary (Repair Kit, Fuel Converter, etc...).  

Due to their prevalence, I fear incoming internals that introduce new mechanics (and therefore create more gameplay depth) will simply be overshadowed by existing passive internals.  As such, I propose the following:

1) Add a slew of "active" internals like the air dodge, that give players more active tools and combat capabilities!
2) Split the Internals into "passive" and "active" states, and increase the total number of available slots by 2 (giving players a total of 4 slots for passive internals and 4 slots for active internals).  
3) Also add passive internals, so as to increase the available selection for passive options.

This new system would depend on the developers to increase the available number of viable internals, but would provide players with different builds! As it stands, I feel as if I'm required to utilize the #1 best selection, so 90% of my builds involve the Advanced Repair Kit and Fuel Converter. These two internals provide me with immense benefits compared to other options.  I receive close to 170 health after killing an enemy and standing on their corpse.  Any time I take damage, I gain fuel.  Compared to every other option, these two are a no-brainer for any class that benefits from repair efficiency or fuel.  It's silly.  


If you have suggestions for internals, please refer to the thread linked above and feel free to provide your opinions!  

Let me know what you think.  CHEERS

Edited by Xacius, October 18 2013 - 06:55 PM.

High MMR (2700+) livestream (scroll down on twitch page for in-depth bio and PC specs).   Check out my Steam Guide!

Exeon is fuzzy bunny bad.

Currently inactive.  Estimated return: TPG 2

#2 tropt

tropt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 254 posts
  • LocationAustralia, Perth

Posted October 18 2013 - 07:59 PM

View PostXacius, on October 18 2013 - 06:39 PM, said:

...the Advanced Repair Kit and Fuel Converter. These two internals provide me with immense benefits compared to other options.  I receive close to 170 health after killing an enemy and standing on their corpse.  Any time I take damage, I gain fuel.  Compared to every other option, these two are a no-brainer for any class that benefits from repair efficiency or fuel.  It's silly.  

This.
Silly and boring.

I always thought it would be cool to start with a bare chasis (A,B or C) and start strapping things onto it, like fuel tanks, weapons, internals that effect how I move, how my guns shoot, how fast I dodge, how long I dodge for etc etc
So the mech is customized to my piloting style
Shooting myself, for damage perks

#3 EliteShooter

EliteShooter

    Mr Splash Man

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,888 posts
  • LocationTunisia

Posted October 18 2013 - 09:18 PM

I know that new stuff will be cool for the players but think of the newcomers ! they really can't get into the game :( Most of my friends didn't keep playing HAWKEN for any long time, they said it's very hard to get used to it :wacko:

Posted Image


#4 Spliff_Craven

Spliff_Craven

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,237 posts

Posted October 18 2013 - 11:00 PM

SUGGESTION: Go back to summer 2013's version when Hawken was fun and the community had a player base!

Sometimes simple is better.

Edited by Spliff_Craven, October 18 2013 - 11:01 PM.


#5 Xacius

Xacius

    The Saltan

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,889 posts
  • LocationOther games, waiting for dev beacon

Posted October 18 2013 - 11:08 PM

View PostSpliff_Craven, on October 18 2013 - 11:00 PM, said:

SUGGESTION: Go back to summer 2013's version when Hawken was fun and the community had a player base!

Sometimes simple is better.

That's not really an option :/

Even that version had its flaws.  Lacked refinement and polish, and was very hard on hardware.

Edited by Xacius, October 18 2013 - 11:08 PM.

High MMR (2700+) livestream (scroll down on twitch page for in-depth bio and PC specs).   Check out my Steam Guide!

Exeon is fuzzy bunny bad.

Currently inactive.  Estimated return: TPG 2

#6 Spliff_Craven

Spliff_Craven

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,237 posts

Posted October 18 2013 - 11:22 PM

View PostXacius, on October 18 2013 - 11:08 PM, said:

That's not really an option :/

Even that version had its flaws.  Lacked refinement and polish, and was very hard on hardware.

I'll give you that; but it seemed to have a better player retention than Ascension currently does.
I feel Hawken sinking. I want to save the ship and win the war.

I know there are growing pains in any games development but there are some things that can't be ignored. Player replayability should be top priority. If players lose interest they lose satisfaction they go somewhere else and we lose another player.

I've played this game religiously for about a year. As of late my devotion is faltering.
I want to believe... but can I still?


SIDENOTE:

Xacius, I really want to thank you for the great personal effort you put towards the development of Hawken.
It's players like you that keep me around.

Edited by Spliff_Craven, October 18 2013 - 11:26 PM.


#7 flimsy

flimsy

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 565 posts

Posted October 18 2013 - 11:28 PM

I like the idea of more active internals, but I'm really leery of adding too much, too fast, given the the rate at which ADH is addressing balance issues. Given that the more active abilities you add, the more behavior permutations you generate, the higher the likelihood that you end up with unexpected optimal combinations that negate huge swaths of gameplay strategies. So yeah, I like to see more stuff added, but very slowly, and in conjunction with faster iterations in the balance process.

I know ADH can't run a persistent testing client for a variety of reasons at present, but a testing client would be a great way to integrate these kinds of features without the risk of super builds.

#8 tropt

tropt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 254 posts
  • LocationAustralia, Perth

Posted October 19 2013 - 01:20 AM

View PostSpliff_Craven, on October 18 2013 - 11:22 PM, said:

Xacius, I really want to thank you for the great personal effort you put towards the development of Hawken.
It's players like you that keep me around.

I second that.
beer donation coming ur way
Shooting myself, for damage perks

#9 UnDeaD_CyBorG

UnDeaD_CyBorG

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 380 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted October 19 2013 - 01:53 AM

Not a bad idea.
I'm not sure they shouldn't just rebalance internals to be more even (Repair kit could be just 10/20/30%, f.Ex.) first, but I guess splitting it is also a solution.
Just; What is active? Fuel Converter may be a bit too strong, but it does allow you to do new things: I occasionally find myself firing Hellfires at my feet so my Rocketeer can climb that last crucial ledge.
How about a Snowflake Holo Emote?


If an enemy fires on me, intent to take my life, I can fight back, or I can turn and flee.
But if a "friendly" tech comes by, intent to take my dignity, I can do nothing.

#10 Muffintrumpet

Muffintrumpet

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 657 posts

Posted October 19 2013 - 03:48 AM

Posted Image


"To the untrained eye this chart may indeed appear to demonstrate a steep and sustained downward trend; however, what you're actually seeing is the line being dragged down because of the strengthening gravitational pull of a player base that is actually increasing in density.  Rest assured, this is all going completely according to plan."


#11 Xacius

Xacius

    The Saltan

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,889 posts
  • LocationOther games, waiting for dev beacon

Posted October 19 2013 - 05:03 AM

View Postflimsy, on October 18 2013 - 11:28 PM, said:

I like the idea of more active internals, but I'm really leery of adding too much, too fast, given the the rate at which ADH is addressing balance issues. Given that the more active abilities you add, the more behavior permutations you generate, the higher the likelihood that you end up with unexpected optimal combinations that negate huge swaths of gameplay strategies. So yeah, I like to see more stuff added, but very slowly, and in conjunction with faster iterations in the balance process.

I know ADH can't run a persistent testing client for a variety of reasons at present, but a testing client would be a great way to integrate these kinds of features without the risk of super builds.

Good point!  I agree that they should probably balance what they have before they add new stuff, but even before that they should fix their game's infrastructure and fix servers.  

View PostSpliff_Craven, on October 18 2013 - 11:22 PM, said:

View PostXacius, on October 18 2013 - 11:08 PM, said:

That's not really an option :/

Even that version had its flaws.  Lacked refinement and polish, and was very hard on hardware.

I'll give you that; but it seemed to have a better player retention than Ascension currently does.
I feel Hawken sinking. I want to save the ship and win the war.

I know there are growing pains in any games development but there are some things that can't be ignored. Player replayability should be top priority. If players lose interest they lose satisfaction they go somewhere else and we lose another player.

I've played this game religiously for about a year. As of late my devotion is faltering.
I want to believe... but can I still?


SIDENOTE:

Xacius, I really want to thank you for the great personal effort you put towards the development of Hawken.
It's players like you that keep me around.


I'm right there with you, but I don't think that reverting to pre-ascension would fix the game's problems.  And yeah, I've spent many hours with this game and just want to see it succeed.  I do what I can, but thank you.  Cheers!

Edited by Xacius, October 19 2013 - 05:03 AM.

High MMR (2700+) livestream (scroll down on twitch page for in-depth bio and PC specs).   Check out my Steam Guide!

Exeon is fuzzy bunny bad.

Currently inactive.  Estimated return: TPG 2

#12 HugeGuts

HugeGuts

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 629 posts

Posted October 19 2013 - 05:08 AM

Considering tuning actually removes choice from the game, I want to see it scraped and rolled into internals. Current passive internals affect gameplay more than almost every tuning option anyway.

Edited by HugeGuts, October 19 2013 - 05:08 AM.


#13 ShadowWarg

ShadowWarg

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,384 posts
  • LocationIn the shadows behind you

Posted October 19 2013 - 07:11 AM

View PostXacius, on October 19 2013 - 05:03 AM, said:

View Postflimsy, on October 18 2013 - 11:28 PM, said:

I like the idea of more active internals, but I'm really leery of adding too much, too fast, given the the rate at which ADH is addressing balance issues. Given that the more active abilities you add, the more behavior permutations you generate, the higher the likelihood that you end up with unexpected optimal combinations that negate huge swaths of gameplay strategies. So yeah, I like to see more stuff added, but very slowly, and in conjunction with faster iterations in the balance process.

I know ADH can't run a persistent testing client for a variety of reasons at present, but a testing client would be a great way to integrate these kinds of features without the risk of super builds.

Good point!  I agree that they should probably balance what they have before they add new stuff, but even before that they should fix their game's infrastructure and fix servers.  

View PostSpliff_Craven, on October 18 2013 - 11:22 PM, said:

View PostXacius, on October 18 2013 - 11:08 PM, said:

That's not really an option :/

Even that version had its flaws.  Lacked refinement and polish, and was very hard on hardware.

I'll give you that; but it seemed to have a better player retention than Ascension currently does.
I feel Hawken sinking. I want to save the ship and win the war.

I know there are growing pains in any games development but there are some things that can't be ignored. Player replayability should be top priority. If players lose interest they lose satisfaction they go somewhere else and we lose another player.

I've played this game religiously for about a year. As of late my devotion is faltering.
I want to believe... but can I still?


SIDENOTE:

Xacius, I really want to thank you for the great personal effort you put towards the development of Hawken.
It's players like you that keep me around.


I'm right there with you, but I don't think that reverting to pre-ascension would fix the game's problems.  And yeah, I've spent many hours with this game and just want to see it succeed.  I do what I can, but thank you.  Cheers!

I'm with you on that. After reading the Q/A and the responses from the devs, I'm not to worried anymore when I think about the long run, my main worries are, the vertical progression, now they are handling the Tech, and them trying to rush for their Dec. release before its ready. (you know, the normal concerns around the forums). There are a lot of things that need to be addressed and there is no way they can be fixed before then. The game is already open to everyone, it just may be better to hold off on having a set release date until both the community(most) AND the devs can agrees that the game is in a good spot.

#14 ArachII

ArachII

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 65 posts
  • LocationQuebec, Canada

Posted October 19 2013 - 07:15 AM

I understand your concerns Xacius, but I have the feeling that the solution you propose will only limit options to the player, since it won't be possible to have two MK-III internals of the same type, i.e. adv. repair kit and replenisher. I would prefer that the internals be more balanced across the board. I know it is hard to balance an internal with a stat bonus versus one with a gameplay change, but I rather go with an open unbalanced system than one with restrictions.

What about someone's desire is only internals with gameplay modifications? Should we limit the number of passive internals instead?

I can't make a final statement about my position on your proposal; There isn't enough internals to have a good idea of how it will work. Once more internals are there, I think it will be easier to see the trend and adjust it with limits if needed. I think it is better to wait and see... :)
"I rather die on my feet than live upon my knees" - Emiliano Zapata

#15 DerMax

DerMax

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,270 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted October 19 2013 - 07:28 AM

View PostArachII, on October 19 2013 - 07:15 AM, said:

I understand your concerns Xacius, but I have the feeling that the solution you propose will only limit options to the player, since it won't be possible to have two MK-III internals of the same type, i.e. adv. repair kit and replenisher.

You didn't read carefully, did you? :)

A great idea overall, but will the devs listen?

#16 M4st0d0n

M4st0d0n

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 770 posts
  • LocationBelgium

Posted October 19 2013 - 07:44 AM

Seems interesting. As long as they dont mess with my Air Rocketeer aka Da Fat Fairy.

Posted Image

#17 ArachII

ArachII

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 65 posts
  • LocationQuebec, Canada

Posted October 19 2013 - 08:21 AM

View PostDerMax, on October 19 2013 - 07:28 AM, said:

You didn't read carefully, did you? :)

I did, simply I am not too favorable, at first, to this system. My apologies, I think my formulation was a bit wrong, it should have been more like this:

I understand your concerns Xacius, but the solution you propose, which I believe reduces the amount of options a player has at the end, pushes players to use internals that won't necessarely suit their gameplay in my opinion. I don't believe that there will be always a game changing internal appealing enough for someone, so to restrict this person to let say 4 slots instead of 6, it isn't something I consider as an improvement. Sure there is room for 4 slots dedicated to game changing internals, but if there is nothing interresting enough for the player's gamestyle, he end up with 2 less slots than before, so less/weaker options for him. And, in the opposite, if someone finds passive internals less interresting than actives ones, should he be penalized too? The main problem I have with this is in order to gain full potential of the slots, someone may end up with something he won't use or enjoy as something else.

Of course, if 6 slots filled up of the same type of internal always overshadow combination of types, then I will welcome this solution, especially if the internals are almost perfectly balanced.

Did I made myself a bit more clear? or am I still confusing someone about why I don't really welcome this idea? Please let me know! :)

Edit: I know there are internals that are almost required due to their benefits, but I think if internals are more balanced, it shouldn't remain a problem. Anyone remember the armor fusor/power surger/evasive device?

Edited by ArachII, October 19 2013 - 08:29 AM.

"I rather die on my feet than live upon my knees" - Emiliano Zapata




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users