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

Jump to content


Movement in Hawken, and why it's critical to the game's success


  • Please log in to reply
170 replies to this topic

#1 Xacius

Xacius

    The Saltan

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

Posted April 02 2014 - 09:50 PM

Wall of text incoming.  Get ready.  

blahblahblah introductions herpderp.  I've been playing Hawken for blah blah yeah.  

In light of recent statements made by Vana, I've concentrated my reactive salt into the following post.  Fair warning, lots of salt.  

Hawken has a definitive lack of FPS elements that, if present, would otherwise attract the average FPS player.  These include, but are not limited to: the turn speed cap, massive AOE on weapons combined with large hitboxes, and poor map design.  

With that being said, I feel that the game's movement has always stood out in comparison to other games in similar titles.  That's why I play the game.  It's why I've dedicated so much time to Hawken.  I never really liked the low TTK shooters with restricted movement and "whoever sees who first wins" type of gameplay.  Hawken offered something different from other games, and now the game seems to be headed in a different direction.  The speed increase made a difference, but on top of the other changes, it’s just not enough.

Tonight’s episode of the cockpit struck me the wrong way, especially after Vana made the following comments:
"Mobility in Hawken is super, super strong.  Period.  It's the strongest thing. Remember when we used to have skill trees? No one gave a 'fuzzy bunny' about offenses or defenses.  They went straight into mobility...  We stored all that on our database... It was almost always, even when we went into ascension.  It was the same thing. Mobility, mobility, mobility, unless that mech did not have mobility. Mobility was just the strongest thing in Hawken, and it needs to be limited."

So… everybody specializes in mobility, and your response is to nerf mobility and reduce movement options?  That doesn't seem right.  Aside from the missing details in that argument (note: offensive and defensive trees being utter garbage for well over 6 months into OB), I don’t believe that that approach will sit well with a large portion of the existing playerbase. Why not balance the classes around high mobility?  Why not increase the mobility of classes that aren't mobile enough?

Many of you already know about the recent #RemoveTheDelay debate.  Due to the lack of additional movement options, the jump-to-bypass the weapons raise after boost had been incorporated into gameplay by those that knew about it.  It was the go-to mechanic for offensive approach, which is (already) disadvantageous due to boost locking down weapons.   Now that the delay has been fixed in the post-boost-jump-state, there is always a delay before you can fire after you boost.  It cannot be bypassed.  The delay lasts for roughly 0.55s, which is HUGE in the middle of a combat engagement.  Since you essentially lock down weapons for both the duration of your boost and half a second after boosting, this reduces both the offensive and defensive capabilities of boosting during combat.  This means that players can either A. Dodge (predictably), B. Walk/Run and shoot back, or C hold spacebar.  In either of those scenarios, the mech with the most health will most likely win the engagement.  Mid-combat mobility has essentially been reduced since this update. The ability to boost around and trick opponents with movement has been hampered by this change.   By imposing a restriction as small at 0.55s delay in weapon firing after boost, the game’s movement has effectively lost a layer of depth (mainly to those who used the bypass prior to its removal).
Were it 0.2s or 0.15s, I don’t think it would be too much of an issue.  Over half of a second, though?  With no noticeable gauge or indication of weapons being locked down? Seems like overkill.

Of course, Vana’s statements above reflect the team’s response to feedback from average players.  In the past, they’ve specifically stated that they’re balancing the game for the average player.  “You don’t balance for the competitive players.  That doesn’t make money.”

True enough, but there is a reasonable middle ground.

Speaking of the average player, let’s examine some mechanics of Hawken that don’t mix too well with the average new player.

As many of you know, Hawken is an FPS.  Most FPS titles do not enforce a turn speed cap.  In fact, Hawken stands out in that regard.  This turn speed cap, to new players that may not understand how it works, is not intuitive.  This could easily be one of the factors that contribute to average players critiquing the game: “not being able to hit fast A-classes.”

Then again, when has an increase of the turn speed cap ever been received poorly?  The Steam update was a step in the right direction in this regard, imo.  

Instead of addressing that, the reduction of movement options is apparently the new solution. :angry:
THE SALT IS REAL

Is it possible that the turn speed cap works against the game more than it works for it?  I’m not suggesting a complete removal, but why have it in the first place if you’re balancing for the “average player” that probably doesn’t care for it or even understand it?  Many new players (both experienced FPS veterans and new players in general) try out Hawken and immediately give it up due to its lack of intuitive mouse controls.  

The mechs have rocket thrusters.  Suppose that were tied into the lore somehow to make faster turning (note: faster, not instant) possible.  I mean, fuzzy bunny, Shift+S already does exactly that.  Hawken could still have a turn speed cap, but it could be faster to promote more intuitive aiming mechanics.  

This is not a rage post.  I'm just confused about some of the design directions and would like some clarification or even a discussion with Vana or other designers.  I think it'd be great to see their reasoning and actually have a chance to discuss some features with them, instead of the usual "Vana responds and only a few people get to speak with him about that response."  

I still love Hawken, but change after change and I'm starting to see the game differently.  I can't say whether or not I'm supportive of more changes that "limit mobility," unless it's made up for somewhere else.  That's really the one thing that's been keeping me here for so long :/

Mobility is key to Hawken, and always has been.  Limit that, and you're closer to the MWO end of the spectrum.  To be fair, MWO is simply a better mech sim (note: sim, referring to the game's genre).  It's possible that other mechanics may need to be looked at to keep the average player interested.  Why settle on removing something that will result in making a fair portion of your dedicated players unhappy?

Edited by Xacius, April 02 2014 - 10:08 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

#2 Dew

Dew

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 558 posts
  • LocationChicago, IL

Posted April 02 2014 - 09:58 PM

I agree with everything said except the parts about the turn rate cap. To me, the turn rate cap is part of the experience regarding movement. It forces you to use movement effectively to reposition in order to maintain a bead on your target. Using movement to either deny line of sight due to turn cap or to maintain sight of your opponent in spite of the turn cap adds a layer to combat for me. It has to be balanced against the speed of the game.

#3 Xacius

Xacius

    The Saltan

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

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:01 PM

View PostDew, on April 02 2014 - 09:58 PM, said:

I agree with everything said except the parts about the turn rate cap. To me, the turn rate cap is part of the experience regarding movement. It forces you to use movement effectively to reposition in order to maintain a bead on your target. Using movement to either deny line of sight due to turn cap or to maintain sight of your opponent in spite of the turn cap adds a layer to combat for me. It has to be balanced against the speed of the game.

I completely agree.  The turn rate cap, at the moment, does not feel like it's balanced with the speed of the game.  This is especially relevant for new players that are familiar with FPS titles (note: a larger portion of people that try the game, as it's advertised as a mech FPS). As you may see, I'm not vying for its removal.  But could it be loosened, especially considering that speeds may increase again? Definitely.  Could mobility be enhanced upon if the turn-speed cap were loosened? Probably.

Add depth, not remove it.  :/

Edited by Xacius, April 02 2014 - 10:04 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

#4 Onstrava

Onstrava

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 188 posts
  • LocationThe Abyss.

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:18 PM

O dear, it's going to take me awhile to read all this, give me a second. :o

Posted Image


#5 rekina

rekina

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 263 posts

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:27 PM

View PostXacius, on April 02 2014 - 09:50 PM, said:

So… everybody specializes in mobility, and your response is to nerf mobility and reduce movement options?  That doesn't seem right.  Aside from the missing details in that argument (note: offensive and defensive trees being utter garbage for well over 6 months into OB), I don’t believe that that approach will sit well with a large portion of the existing playerbase. Why not balance the classes around high mobility?  Why not increase the mobility of classes that aren't mobile enough?

I didn't play that 'mobility' era you are talking about, but I don't think boosting slower mechs speed to the faster mech level(or near of) is a 100% right solution. Removing mobility can be a viable solution since 1) it is obvious that as people getting experiences in Hawken, more and more will find out better and faster movement skills as now only elite players do, 2) and it is going to be a power inflation.

I'm not saying the more speed the less fun. But I'm certainly sure that the more speed doesn't guarantee the more fun. Also the more power doesn't guarantee a better gaming experience. It is called power inflation in gaming, as you might know already. When everything is get buffed and everyone is flying around in a light speed, it is no more fun.

One other thing I'm pretty sure about is that many gamers(including elite and average) tend to think they understand better about the game while developers are being idiots, but this is not true. Developers are as much smart as gamers and as much experienced as gamers if they were not even much smarter and experienced than gamers. In fact, they are. Because they have statistics. Players tend to think in a biased way, I'm not saying this is wrong since it's how human nature works, but it doesn't mean they are right.

Developers have more access to reliable data and statistics. They tend to not be biased than players. If you ask me whom I'm going to believe in balancing matter - I'm sorry, but I'd pick developers. It seems more rational to me.

Edited by rekina, April 02 2014 - 10:28 PM.


#6 Xacius

Xacius

    The Saltan

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

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:30 PM

View Postrekina, on April 02 2014 - 10:27 PM, said:

View PostXacius, on April 02 2014 - 09:50 PM, said:

So… everybody specializes in mobility, and your response is to nerf mobility and reduce movement options?  That doesn't seem right.  Aside from the missing details in that argument (note: offensive and defensive trees being utter garbage for well over 6 months into OB), I don’t believe that that approach will sit well with a large portion of the existing playerbase. Why not balance the classes around high mobility?  Why not increase the mobility of classes that aren't mobile enough?
1. One other thing I'm pretty sure about is that many gamers(including elite and average) tend to think they understand better about the game while developers are being idiots, but this is not true. 2. Developers are as much smart as gamers and as much experienced as gamers if they were not even much smarter and experienced than gamers. In fact, they are. 3. Because they have statistics. Players tend to think in a biased way, I'm not saying this is wrong since it's how human nature works, but it doesn't mean they are right.

1.  With that statement, you're poisoning the well.
2.  The developers have literally stated "We're not as good as the high tier players.  We don't see the game the same way."   If they're not as good as the elite players at the game that they're making, how does that make them more experienced?  This isn't a play on skillsets, it's merely a response to your claims.  
3.  Having statistics does not automatically make your decisions right or make you smarter.  It's how you interpret and respond to those statistics that governs changes.  In fact, I've seen a lot of bias resulting from "statistics" in Hawken alone.  Remember Ascension?  That era of Hawken was entirely based on player feedback and was later scrapped because it didn't work.  Oftentimes, being too reliant on data or feedback can be detrimental to the success of a game.

Edited by Xacius, April 02 2014 - 10:35 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

#7 rekina

rekina

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 263 posts

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:32 PM

View PostXacius, on April 02 2014 - 10:30 PM, said:

View Postrekina, on April 02 2014 - 10:27 PM, said:

View PostXacius, on April 02 2014 - 09:50 PM, said:

So… everybody specializes in mobility, and your response is to nerf mobility and reduce movement options?  That doesn't seem right.  Aside from the missing details in that argument (note: offensive and defensive trees being utter garbage for well over 6 months into OB), I don’t believe that that approach will sit well with a large portion of the existing playerbase. Why not balance the classes around high mobility?  Why not increase the mobility of classes that aren't mobile enough?
1. One other thing I'm pretty sure about is that many gamers(including elite and average) tend to think they understand better about the game while developers are being idiots, but this is not true. 2. Developers are as much smart as gamers and as much experienced as gamers if they were not even much smarter and experienced than gamers. In fact, they are. 3. Because they have statistics. Players tend to think in a biased way, I'm not saying this is wrong since it's how human nature works, but it doesn't mean they are right.
2. ...If they're not as good as the elite players at the game that they're making, how does that make them more experienced?  This isn't a play on skillsets, it's merely a response to your claims.  
3.  Having statistics does not automatically make your decisions right.  It's how you interpret and respond to those statistics that governs changes.

2. In game developing sense =)
3. I believe it at least leads your decision to the right way. Generally speaking.

Edited by rekina, April 02 2014 - 10:33 PM.


#8 Analysis

Analysis

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 687 posts

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:37 PM

I didn't read all of this, but isn't it obvious why there is a turn speed cap? If there was no turn speed in terms of aiming then the speed of different classes would not has any effect on a fight. Aiming in general is not that difficult when there is no turn speed limitation. If the turn speed was removed or lowered sufficiently a C-class would almost always beat A and B-classes due to the difference in health. You allow for faster turn speeds and you completely eliminate any speed advantage of different classes.

#9 VocalMagic

VocalMagic

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 490 posts

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:38 PM

I see no problem with the turn rate cap as it is.
I only see a problem with how it is handled. There needs to be some sort of indication that you hit it, or are about to hit it.
As your "average", in terms of skill, player; The kind whose "FPS" experience is limited to offline HALO, and the craziest shooter, period, I've played is S4 League, I do not feel that the turn rate cap hinders me at all. I am capable of keeping all mechs in my sights regardless of class. I'm having trouble leading them, but this is because I still think with Hitscan and heavy arcs. However, I fail at leading my targets with them in the same location on my screen. I do not violently spaz with my wrist to try to get them into position, I glide smoothly, this has some effect on me not hitting the turn cap. But really, if there's a turn rate cap, why would you try to turn past it?

I have had no trouble getting into this game and playing it. I had some mild panic attacks trying to play for a week before the jump to Steam (Signed up long time back, computer wasn't up to snuff. I eventually got a new one and then I played), but it was fun enough for me to stick around. So yeah, I believe that if a game's design can prevent panic attacks stemming from the anxiety I get trying to play against others, I think they're doing something right.

Edited by VocalMagic, April 02 2014 - 10:38 PM.

I'll try shouting it again today: "Saturnine! Saturnine! Stop the spam, Saturnine!"

_, ,_ ∩ ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
( ゚∀゚)彡 S9!S9!▒▒▒
 ⊂彡▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒


#10 ArchMech

ArchMech

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 69 posts
  • LocationLynn Ma USA tuff place to live

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:41 PM

so after hearing xacius's salt in TS i have this to say (sooooo not reading that wall of text)

this post in a nut shell i guess there's no substitute for practice, awareness, and application, game alterations may not always result in balance, if you make the game slow people good at slow games will come, if you make it fast, fast players come

-i feel there are a lot of factors to some statement about mobility being to strong, and another statement about the average player relates here too

-first about mobility being to strong, that comes from remembering as many sticky walls and floors as we can avoiding them at all costs thats on you, more in game factors is 2 bullets below

-but also exerting pressure, using effective jukes/dodges, and predicting dodges through the opponents "tell" this is no different then ever before and can not be affected directly by anything you change in game for any game, there will always be a disparity between your sixth sense and the games " laws"

-WoW league ToR CoD skill shots no scopes hardcore mode all this practice in any of those games/modes/techniques gives you map preparedness avatar awareness enemy prediction it makes you aware of your reaction speed etc

-in game factors include:

           -stealth walk and the idea of relying on radar, again 6th sense
           -counter mobility being limited, this is the fabled turn speed cap
   -the weapon raise timer helps counter mobile and/or stealthy ganks as well as help them, and the jump timer is just a derp "leap into battle"  i call it now that i feel more aware of it (without ever focusing on it to much =p)
   -spawn points REALLY REALLY IMPORTANT

i think this is a very insightful post i've written here
idk I've got more to say i feel but its hard to say them without making it seem to hard and to far based on professional level practice techniques

theres mobility and then theres pre planning map awareness info info info
don't ever expect that altering mobility will ever change anything in the way you want it to unless you analyze the person OVER the game, as well as how THAT PERSON analyzes

Edited by ArchMech, April 02 2014 - 10:53 PM.

Just your standard fantasy lover don't mind me, Cats > People, LOL@comics sig
http://twitch.tv/ArcanicFlame http://youtube.com/user/gamemaste288
http://Pwning.com <this site is awesome
Hawken Community Events

#11 rekina

rekina

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 263 posts

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:42 PM

In many games elite/experienced players tend to behave against developers in developing direction. They just don't like changes. They always talk about "it wasn't like this back then..." even if the game was way more broken 'then.' I've seen this too many times to be honest. What I'm saying is that I decided to believe developers more than my, possibly more biased opinion. I don't want to say my opinion is biased, but hey, that's how our brain works. When devs nerf mechs you main, you get depressed. How is it not normal? Who wouldn't?

If you want to keep insisting your argument, it's fine. Again, I'm not saying you are entirely wrong. I just think there should be plausible reason behind the decision Devs made, reducing general mobility. I can't stress this enough again, it seems more rational to me. :)

Edited by rekina, April 02 2014 - 10:46 PM.


#12 palad1ne

palad1ne

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,098 posts
  • Locationuninstalled

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:46 PM

In the past, HWK Game Designers listen too much to the demands of 2% Elite Players and not what the main playerbase has to say. I am happy that HWK moves on now, leaving the Garbage behind, which are destroyed some of the small playerbase with selfish demands.
The company need money and this is only possible if you deliver some product for the average Play. So we all can profit from this. New Servers. good Performance. New Stuff.


I like the Game now, how it is. No more technical difficulties. everything runs smooth(30ms ping). If they now could figure out,how to get rid of the Cheaterz then everything should be fine.

IMO its very poor, one thread after another, drooling after an exploit. Thats what it is in fact. Like HWK Vana stated.

Again, they are only two ways. Make the exploit an official Game Mechanic or remove it. FFs this should not be the only advantage you guys had over nuubs.

so..its obvious

#removetheexploits #dealwithit  

Posted Image

#13 Lucier

Lucier

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 263 posts
  • LocationUS East

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:51 PM

View Postpalad1ne, on April 02 2014 - 10:46 PM, said:

IMO its very poor, one thread after another, drooling after an exploit. Thats what it is in fact. Like HWK Vana stated.

Again, they are only two ways. Make the exploit an official Game Mechanic or remove it. FFs this should not be the only advantage you guys had over nuubs.

Nobody is asking for the exploit to be reinstated.

#14 Xacius

Xacius

    The Saltan

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

Posted April 02 2014 - 10:55 PM

Vana specifically stated that A-classes are too strong. They have higher win-rates and KDR than C-classes and, as such, need to have their effectiveness reduced in order to make C's and B's more appealing.  To that I ask: Why not increase the mobility on C's and B's instead of limiting A's further?  As it stands, A's can practically be one-shotted in the current meta.  My main point is as follows: There are other ways to go about balancing the game than removing appealing elements of gameplay.

End-goal: make B's and C's more appealing to play.  Potential ways of doing this:
1. Reduce A-class viability by hurting mobility.  
2. Make B's and C's more viable in their own right without harming A-classes.  

I see one option that will piss existing players off, and another option that will make both C/B parties happy.  I'll say it before, Alpha speeds had it right!  

Additionally, what else about C class can you think of that might be causing it to lose to B's/A's, especially in average games?  
Hmmm... good ques-
fuzzy bunny TURRET MODE.  Many players have been saying this for a long time, and yet it remains as a feature.  Turret mode is simply terrible.  The mechanics of the game do not make for turret mode being successful in most circumstances, and until it's changed or otherwise fixed, I don't see the classes being successful in average lobbies, especially compared to mechs with real abilities.  That is, unless you nerf the mechs with real abilities.  >_>

The mechanic is and has been a joke.  If you want to make more people interested in C classes, then why not scrap the one ability that makes them less appealing (from the standpoint of viability) than every other mech in the game?  Predator has awesome wallhax, Raider has a fuzzy bunny sick boost-firing speedfreak ability, Scout has a fuel tank/speed boost, and Infiltrator has cloak.  And what does a Brawler/Grenadier/Rocketeer/Vanguard have?  Toggleable significantly reduced speed, slight damage buff from the front, and insta-gib damage from the back.   With varying stats here or there.  In a game based on movement, an ability that severely limits that movement for slight damage buffs and gimmicky damage reduction simply has no place.  

Imagine if Vanguard's turret mode was converted into a deployable shield wall.  Then it could actually push the front-line!  Brawler could have a passive regen aura for surrounding allies, Grenadier could have an AOE buff for the duration of the ability, etc...  There are many possibilities.  

Potential awesome ideas:
-B's and C's are bigger, yeah?  So give them stronger thrusters that give higher initial acceleration, but less max speed (not less than they have now, for clarification.  Less in relation to the acceleration increase).
-increase their turn speeds
-Hell, reduce dodge cooldowns and make it universal for all classes but make the dodges faster/slower and cover more/less distance based on the class (like they already are).  
-reduce hitbox size of C's (something less than the current "as big as a barn" lol)
-replace turret mode with abilities that are actually useful/fun to use.  

Part of the reason why C's perform worse is because their hitboxes are so massive that even the worst players can manage to tick shots and residual AOE damage.  Combine that with small maps/tight corridors and you have a balance nightmare.  Of course the classes with smaller hitboxes are going to have an advantage in those circumstances.   Imagine if C's were only slightly bigger than B's.  They'd instantly become harder to hit, improving their survivability.  Obviously that would require the resizing of a lot of assets, so that's probably not an option, but it's something to think about :/

For now, a dodge cooldown reduction and acceleration increase could give C-players something more to work with.  But please, please don't hurt the mobility of A's.  There are better options in terms of balancing the game than reducing/removing movement aspects.

Edited by Xacius, April 03 2014 - 03:31 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

#15 Onstrava

Onstrava

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 188 posts
  • LocationThe Abyss.

Posted April 02 2014 - 11:02 PM

Alright here we go..you ready for this Xacius? :P I'm just kidding, I agree for the most part, not on everything though but I made that clear already. I believe that the hawken team is going down the route of Chromehounds, oviously there are huge differences but thats what I thought when they lowered the speed. The only way that would work though is if they made the maps HUUUGGEE like chrome hounds. The whole "slow mech thing", gave chromehounds that "realism" feel but still keeping it arcady with the aiming<-not a bad thing. The only reason Chromehounds died was because of microsoft, gg. As for the direction of where Hawken is going..well I can't say since I don't work there. I can say this though, if they lowered the turn speed restriction and allowed you to turn faster. They could make the game as fast as they wanted really, of course not spaz fast but you know what I mean. All things in good time though, I don't know exactly what the devs want but I'll wait and see what happens.

Edited by Onstrava, April 02 2014 - 11:38 PM.

Posted Image


#16 ArchMech

ArchMech

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 69 posts
  • LocationLynn Ma USA tuff place to live

Posted April 02 2014 - 11:38 PM

C mechs are broken with fault going entirely to the ineptness of their flippin turret mode ability designer and theres not much more to be said about that vs A mechs when considering that farse xacius
B mechs also shouldnt be targeted in that buff post considering the assault is strong, the pred has viability, the t32 got buffed (+ to both raid AND pred) the SS is OP range, the G2.....idfk scrap that thing naow theres NO ingenuity there whatsoever,
as for bruiser i think its ability is uhm......again.....flippin hyperlame i have sum ideas for it but most employ physics the game doesn't have yet

im just going to rephrase and condense something here,

There's no substitute for practice, focus, awareness, preparedness, application, thought, patience, analyzing, prediction, memorization, repetition, and there is no counter, no easy button, no negate, no playbook

Edited by ArchMech, April 02 2014 - 11:51 PM.

Just your standard fantasy lover don't mind me, Cats > People, LOL@comics sig
http://twitch.tv/ArcanicFlame http://youtube.com/user/gamemaste288
http://Pwning.com <this site is awesome
Hawken Community Events

#17 ArchMech

ArchMech

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 69 posts
  • LocationLynn Ma USA tuff place to live

Posted April 02 2014 - 11:54 PM

OMFG ONSTRAVA TY I FORGOT ABOUT CHROMEHOUNDS OMFFFFGGGGGG
now i have sum additional reference material id previously forgotten and after 5 months of hawken did not even register in my mind, god that game was forgettable
KNOWN REFERENCE MATERIAL FOR HAWKEN
AC
chromehounds
mechwarrior
titanfall

now that i remember chromehounds my eyes have opened

Edited by ArchMech, April 03 2014 - 12:37 AM.

Just your standard fantasy lover don't mind me, Cats > People, LOL@comics sig
http://twitch.tv/ArcanicFlame http://youtube.com/user/gamemaste288
http://Pwning.com <this site is awesome
Hawken Community Events

#18 Xacius

Xacius

    The Saltan

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

Posted April 03 2014 - 12:03 AM

View PostArchMech, on April 02 2014 - 11:38 PM, said:

C mechs are broken with fault going entirely to the ineptness of their flippin turret mode ability designer and theres not much more to be said about that vs A mechs when considering that farse xacius

I almost completely forgot about it.  Probably because it hasn't been a factor in any state of the game I've played to date.  lol.  Updated second post to represent that.  

Thing is, I can't think of a single player that is more useful in turret mode than they are out of turret mode in the same mech.  There is no other class in the game with an ability that actually makes you perform statistically worse in combat.  Name a successful gren that predominantly uses turret mode.  Name a successful Rocketeer that performs at the top of a lobby in turret mode.  No matter what they do, aside from making the ability overbearingly strong, it won't work.  It should be changed, but instead they're going to nerf other classes to make them more comparable, instead of actually addressing the real issue?  

That's what strikes me as "off" about this whole situation.  Balancing/changing current mechanics without fixing ones that have been broken/not working for months, if not over a year.  

That right there is the reason why the Incinerator with the PPA is far too strong for its own good.  PPA was buffed before the big Saare projectile was fixed.

Posted Image

Edited by Xacius, April 03 2014 - 12:26 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

#19 AsianJoyKiller

AsianJoyKiller

    Lithium Cellophane Unicorn Salad

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,011 posts
  • LocationWI

Posted April 03 2014 - 12:15 AM

View Postpalad1ne, on April 02 2014 - 10:46 PM, said:

In the past, HWK Game Designers listen too much to the demands of 2% Elite Players and not what the main playerbase has to say.
That is blatantly untrue.
Ever since Alpha the game has progressively become more and more casual friendly.

[HWK]HUGHES, on July 03 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:

AJK is right

The Sinful Infil HEAT Cannon Hustler, Cloaking and Smoking, C-Class Swagger, Ballin' n' Brawlin'


#20 LU0P10

LU0P10

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 241 posts
  • LocationHell - sinki

Posted April 03 2014 - 12:33 AM

http://www.gamesindu...ing-mass-appeal

What has been bugged me over everything else that developers doesn't seem to have clear vision to whom they are making the game.
Or their emphasis switches all the time.
Right now for example moving speeds are in the middle ground that no one exactly happy. I'd prefer the extreme version with more speed. Making Hawken the game that every fps gamers would whisper "do you know that fast pace mech fps... what it's name,  I forgot?" Then the answer would always would be "Hawken of course".

When we now got a bit more speed... devs were right increasing turn speed too... but was it enough? IMO no. That hurts noobs... avg. fps fans cannot comprehend negative turn rate cap. I've seen that said in game chat...

And predictably my old whining has to worded again: sticky aimbot or lock on weapons doesn't belong in the fps.  .   .
This game is so addictive... increasing number of players are talking about should go to AA...




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users