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

Jump to content


Remove Explosive Stagger/Stunlock


  • Please log in to reply
85 replies to this topic

Poll: Remove stagger/stun (118 member(s) have cast votes)

Remove stagger/stun from explosives_

  1. Yes. (79 votes [66.95%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 66.95%

  2. No. (39 votes [33.05%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 33.05%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#81 Karaipantsu

Karaipantsu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted December 29 2012 - 07:43 PM

Don't feed the troll.

EDIT:  Oh good, pushed it to a new page.

Edited by Karaipantsu, December 29 2012 - 07:44 PM.


#82 BlackCephie

BlackCephie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 665 posts
  • LocationWashington D.C.

Posted January 18 2013 - 05:54 PM

It doesn't bother me either. High explosives should cause stagger. Why_ Because its physics. It reinforces the idea that forces have equal and opposite reactions, and in a game where gravity plays such a pivotal role in lending to the games immersion and flow, I would say that say that a stagger fits perfectly. You are correct that the game is meant to be fast paced and fluid. That is why stun/stagger is a good mechanic. It incentivizes staying mobile and fighting smart, cuz if you don't and get nailed, well we know what happens.

It is the perfect counter balance, as it relates to the flow of gameplay, and gameplay mechanics.

That said, I think that the stagger could be reduced. Makes no sense whatsoever to completely remove it though.
Posted Image

#83 Karaipantsu

Karaipantsu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted January 18 2013 - 06:16 PM

Except the very concept you're using to argue for it works even more in favor against it.  When being clobbered in the back by rockets leaving an engagement, physics basically states that you should be quicker propelled out of the area, not stopped dead in your tracks.  Same with being hit on the sides, top, or basically anywhere but the front.

If it worked in an actually physics driven manner, yes, it'd be a nice bit of nuance in the game.  But it doesn't.

#84 BlackCephie

BlackCephie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 665 posts
  • LocationWashington D.C.

Posted January 18 2013 - 06:21 PM

I'm not saying they have to adhere to the principles to the detail, but its presence is at least an acknowledgement that "Yes, you got hit really hard by something really big, therefore this happened". Having stagger be absent completely would just be silly.

Edited by BlackCephie, January 18 2013 - 06:22 PM.

Posted Image

#85 Karaipantsu

Karaipantsu

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted January 18 2013 - 07:04 PM

Agreed.  But it's current form is garbage, and it'd take a lot of work to make it not garbage.  More work than to take it out altogether.

#86 BlackCephie

BlackCephie

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 665 posts
  • LocationWashington D.C.

Posted January 18 2013 - 07:09 PM

I mean, all they need to do is simply decrease the amount of stagger caused on impact. Shouldn't be too hard. I guess we shall see with the new patch.

Edited by BlackCephie, January 18 2013 - 07:10 PM.

Posted Image




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users