46 replies to this topic

[ShadowGTR]

AsianJoyKiller, on February 04 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

Quote

*This is a joke.

*Slams fists on desk and storms off in a rage*

I swear upon my life, Hugs will curse the day she toyed with my emotions!

((OOC: <3))

Well, I learned two things today: What an RP server is, and what OOC means.

[AsianJoyKiller]

ShadowGTR, on February 04 2013 - 01:00 PM, said:

Well, I learned two things today: What an RP server is, and what OOC means.

RIP CoX Virtue server. Pocket-D ftw.

(Sorry, I'll stop being wildly off topic now)

[Conquistador]

[HWK]Hugs, on February 04 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

This. Is. Awesome. Took me most of my morning to read. I love this. I want to read it again, with less distractions, tonight. You've really got a handle on the voice! I'm super impressed and sending this around Team HAWKEN. We're going to need to think about rp servers!*

xxoo

*This is a joke.

I sincerely hope the rp servers are the joke and that you're actually serious about sharing the report with your colleagues.

Just checking. C:

[Conquistador]

MEMO #7-514-986-39 FOR DISPATCH TO THE OFFICE OF THE SEINE MARKETING DIRECTOR

To my esteemed colleague:

After reviewing my previous memorandum to your offices, I have in fact identified a few errors that require greater clarification. I would like to focus on the issues of our REV-GL and HEAT Cannon product lines, specifically, as they seem to be the most controversial.

draco7891, on February 04 2013 - 01:46 AM, said:

As well, lowering damage both reduces total potential damage AND increases the time of exposure required to produce that damage.

Whilst we agree that the primary purpose of the REV-GL product is area denial, and are willing to concede that damage reduction will reduce the amount of damage-per-second delivered by the weapon, increasing time of exposure is NOT an acceptable drawback for a mortar-class weapon that does not require line-of-sight. The very nature of the weapon’s arc allows pilots to employ it behind obstacles, thus mitigating any increased risk to exposure. We still propose, in addition to damage reduction, an increase to weapons heat generation. By retaining current rates of fire, the Grenadier-class heavy saber will still be capable of firing-for-effect within a specific area of denial, albeit for shorter periods of time. Doing so will not deny the weapon’s intended purpose, merely restrain it slightly.
In addition, the weapon’s ammunition exhibits odd magnetic characteristics where projectiles rebound towards the closest available warm chassis in the area, thus providing an unintentional “pseudo-homing” effect that has caused frustration amongst our more veteran pilots. We highly suggest applying our industrial-strength Polestar-type demagnetizer to all REV-GL ammunition, to allow the weapon to better emulate our Grenade Launcher projectile behaviour (which does not exhibit magnetic characteristics).

Quote

SEINE takes this opportunity to remind Prosk of the existence of their own products, the Model 140 RevGL, and the Model 58 EOC Repeater, which are both primary weapon systems designed for and able to apply splash damage around obstacles.

Gun camera footage analyzed from HEAT Cannon users has shown that an AOE reduction will do little to change weapon behavior as a burst-damage powerhouse. While existing AOE makes the weapon relatively easier for pilots to aim, reducing that characteristic alone just marginally increases the skill floor. Increasing heat generation (similar to the situation with Block III EOC Repeaters before Prosk engineers found that sandwich left in the heatsink press by a careless visiting Sentium director) leaves the weapon easy to aim, but reduces pilot incentive to "hunt" for damage by preemptively firing on corners, due to the tactical heat disadvantage such hunting burdens them with, when and if the target presents itself more directly. SEINE sees this as appropriate due to the tactical choice given to the pilot, while disincentivizing potentially wasteful behavior (but maintaining newer pilot ease-of-use).

A correction to my previous statement: The HEAT Cannon is the only Class-I charged burst weapon that exhibits explosive detonation upon immediate projectile impact. The REV-GL does not exhibit instantaneous detonation, nor does the timed delay on the EOC Repeater projectiles. Coupled with the high fire rate of the HEAT cannon, this large explosive area of effect being triggered upon impact allows pilots to successfully “splash” non-feathered explosives around corners faster than any of its contemporaries. No other charged burst weapon (or burst Class-II primary, for that matter) possesses a large explosive splash on-impact (e.g. The Flak cannon requires line of sight, as, realistically, does the EOC Repeater, due to the long time delay.)

In this regard, raising the skill floor slightly is actually to be encouraged, as other weapons simply cannot compete with this weapon’s ability to outdamage opponents from extreme ranges behind cover. We would like to clarify that we do not want to remove the weapon’s area of effect detonation entirely, merely rein it into more manageable levels. Reducing the weapon’s area-of-effect will mitigate this weapon’s popularity, as it will increase exposure of HEAT Cannon-equipped mechs and force more engagements out in the open, where other weapons have at least some semblance of a fighting chance.

Quote

It is difficult without a field trial to impress upon the general public just how slowly Stalwart motors actually operate; that said, SEINE recommends motor tuning such that even cumbersome Prosk C-class units at nominal walk speeds be able to out-traverse the motor. Maintaining full transverse speed should not result in a firing solution taking place.

We are concerned this solution will render all our turrets impotent, if they cannot even traverse to cover a heavy saber’s minimum walking speed. The only application this would leave the turret would be as a buffer, or to deter opponents from travelling straight towards the weapon, as walking perpendicular to the weapon’s field of fire would result in a slow, inactive, and possibly perpetual traversal state. While we realize that Sentium has a long history of using weapons of questionable utility (e.g. the portable singing sonar system, which serenaded opponents with smooth jazz), Prosk politely abstains from rendering our already-depleted weapons caches inert in such a fashion.

Quote

After several weeks of having the elevators to the Sentium Manufacturing Division on sudden and irreconcilable maintenance, The Manufacturing and Production Director came up with the brilliant solution of only installing half as much traversal track, effectively halving production costs (while also halving turret traversal). Marketing suggests this only as a brainstorming exercise, as it is unknown whether our Prosk-led Product Testing Division possesses sufficient cranial capacity to comprehend placing turrets that can only fire in the forward arc. Studies are on-going.

As a footnote: Limiting turret traversal to a restricted 90-180 degree arc is a potentially acceptable solution. We would like to remind you that all candidates we have recommended to your corporate offices have been somewhat lacking in comprehension skills, and would like to state that they are a poor point of comparison for the regular employees we have retained.

To prove this point, we are submitting one of our most capable female candidates to your laboratories, and have graciously equipped her with an experimental prototype of our time-space quantum traversal device*. We would highly suggest conducting a series of turret-related tests with our candidate, to determine if your turret algorithms are capable of outsmarting her. Please note, she has been promised static companionship and some form of pastry as a reward, and will be incredibly irritated if she is provided neither.


Signed and Counter-signed:

Chiron
Official Designation/Corporate Callsign: “Centauri”
Senior Military Consultant, Megacorporate Analytics Department (MAD)
“Ours is not to reason why.”


*Any attempts to reverse tamper with or reverse-engineer this device will result in quantum collapse of Sentium laboratories. Our candidate has been instructed to destroy your supercomputers in a battle of mental attrition if her safety is compromised (if, after all exercises, she is still alive). You have been warned.

Edited by Conquistador, February 04 2013 - 11:22 PM.

[draco7891]

SEINE Marketing Directive Release 84522-1285.08

To the Office of the Megacorporate Analytics Department;

With regard to your recent kind correspondence, the Sentium Board of Directors wishes to announce its decisions and comments regarding the following matters.

Conquistador, on February 04 2013 - 11:13 PM, said:

We still propose, in addition to damage reduction, an increase to weapons heat generation. By retaining current rates of fire, the Grenadier-class heavy saber will still be capable of firing-for-effect within a specific area of denial, albeit for shorter periods of time. Doing so will not deny the weapon’s intended purpose, merely restrain it slightly.

SEINE continues to forsee potential issues in reducing time-of-denial, particularly in the areas of near-heat-threshold operation following attempted denial activities. Attempting such maneuvers with lighter classed heatsinks may result in unacceptably large pilot vulnerability projections, especially given the unique cumbersome (but necessary) chassis.

Conquistador, on February 04 2013 - 11:13 PM, said:

We would like to clarify that we do not want to remove the weapon’s area of effect detonation entirely, merely rein it into more manageable levels. Reducing the weapon’s area-of-effect will mitigate this weapon’s popularity, as it will increase exposure of HEAT Cannon-equipped mechs and force more engagements out in the open, where other weapons have at least some semblance of a fighting chance.

SEINE computational modeling of battle parameters gives a 78.23% chance of no change in fighting stance or operations given even quite extreme reduction values in this area.

However, regarding the previous two points, the Sentium board has voted to form a subcommittee for a commission to study the potential effects of adding a budgetary item to the vote for the design and color of the report on the combat effect of such changes. It is the hope of everyone at SEINE to be working alongside our Prosk counterparts for the testing and development of such changes, in as few as 3 to 5 years.

Conquistador, on February 04 2013 - 11:13 PM, said:

In addition, the weapon’s ammunition exhibits odd magnetic characteristics where projectiles rebound towards the closest available warm chassis in the area, thus providing an unintentional “pseudo-homing” effect that has caused frustration amongst our more veteran pilots.

Careful reconciliation of the Sentium Logistics Division shipping records has uncovered several misdirected shipments of "Cloister Mk.VII" magnetic ordnance paint. Sentium profusely apologizes for the mixup, and has rectified several responsible parties. In fact, they rectified so well prior to expiration that Sentium has now begun development on an organo-phosphate based mass-current rectifying agent for use in our Sentium "Icarus Mk.I" deuterium-deuterium fusion breeder reactors.

Conquistador, on February 04 2013 - 11:13 PM, said:

The only application this would leave the turret would be as a buffer, or to deter opponents from travelling straight towards the weapon, as walking perpendicular to the weapon’s field of fire would result in a slow, inactive, and possibly perpetual traversal state.

As Prosk Standard Operational Philosophy is to march singlefile into battle (in an attempt, it is theorized, to hide their numbers), it is expected that your office not be immediately familiar with the operation of chokepoints or control thereof. SEINE feels that turrets should require more innovative deployment techniques in order to remain as effective as they are currently, making their use more situational rather than ubiquitous (the cause of Prosk's current ordnance shortage).

Conquistador, on February 04 2013 - 11:13 PM, said:

While we realize that Sentium has a long history of using weapons of questionable utility (e.g. the portable singing sonar system, which serenaded opponents with smooth jazz)

Prosk is reminded that the "Kenny-G Mk.X" was fielded successfully against several gelatin-dessert-related mass prison riots, and continues to serve today as Sentium's first-line less-than-lethal option. When given a choice between the PSSS and the second-line option ("Terrible Mk.XVI" mechanized sharkbears), 4 out of 5 prisoners elected to return to their cells peacefully. Purely by coincidence, available prison capacity was also increased by 20% during the same test.

Conquistador, on February 04 2013 - 11:13 PM, said:

To prove this point, we are submitting one of our most capable female candidates to your laboratories, and have graciously equipped her with an experimental prototype of our time-space quantum traversal device*. We would highly suggest conducting a series of turret-related tests with our candidate, to determine if your turret algorithms are capable of outsmarting her. Please note, she has been promised static companionship and some form of pastry as a reward, and will be incredibly irritated if she is provided neither.

In the spirit of the Inter-Corporate Mutual Destructive Testing Treaty, your proffered candidate has been processed and issued one Sentium "Blaze Mk.I" orange jumpsuit and one pair Sentium "Springbok Mk.IV" long-fall boots.

In accordance with the Treaty, all potential test subjects are informed that they are entitled to be informed of the tests about to be performed on them. This constitutes all legally required information. Interacting with the Sentium Bipolar Analytical Tesselation and Systemic Heuristic Intelligence Testing and Informal Non-Sympathetic Articulation Noesis Entity AI in any non-approved, non-testing methodology may result in the immediate deployment of various neurotoxin emitters.

Furthermore, in the event of catasток...ю.ѕћ...цв..а҆*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*....

Message Terminated, No Carrier.

Abort, Retry, Fail_

[Gherid_lacksGPS]

I love you guys, but really....you need to get out more.....






































I'm serious.

[Conquistador]

Gherid_lacksGPS, on February 05 2013 - 02:02 AM, said:

I'm serious.

Our offices would like to assure you that all our pilots are forced to maintain a healthy physical and mental lifestyle. Admittedly, each memorandum takes less than half an hour to write, so it isn't some great commitment, per say.

[Steffaneff]

Speaking of weapons of all sorts, I would request Prosk to have a look at laser/energy based weaponry.
I am unaware of any legal trademarks that does not belong to Prosk to be able to deliver such products.
Also, I agree that Prosk would require much man time making this weapon "fit" (balancing) into it's already
impressive shell/rocket based arsenal.
I must state that while the opinion on the HEAT Cannon are expressed toward reducing it's charge time to avoid abuse toward the system, I am actually opposed to it. The Infiltrator, being an agile but light mech, does profit of this weapon trait as being able to hide for a small time, charge and then get out of cover to deliver it's load. I must remind you that boosting forward makes any burst weapon to lose it's charge. Also, it somewhat balances the low-level Infiltrator with it's higher level twin, as the higher level tends to reach max charge faster.
This also keep the Infiltrator as a threat to any C-Class mechs.

Edited by Steffaneff, February 22 2013 - 11:04 AM.

[Saturnine]

The owner of Prosk industries, a man by the name of Khang Le, is diametrically opposed to laser or other energy based weaponry (it is believed that he is allergic) and so they will not be producing any such weapons into the foreseeable future.

Sentium, as well, has expressed a lack of interest in putting the time, energy, and money into producing such a weapon, as well.

Crion called them both a bunch of wusses, and, well... Look what happened.

[Cpt_Kill_Jack]

Majic12, on February 02 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

tl;dr nerf vulcan

no, srsly, nice read, really well written.. will finish later

You leave my Vulcan alone.

[Guiotine]

Saturnine, on February 22 2013 - 11:19 AM, said:

The owner of Prosk industries, a man by the name of Khang Le, is diametrically opposed to laser or other energy based weaponry (it is believed that he is allergic) and so they will not be producing any such weapons into the foreseeable future.

I am allergic to lasers as well. Believe me, when I am exposed to energy or light-based weaponry, it gets... messy. It's not a pretty sight I can tell you that.

[Lorenzitto]

what about C.O.N.E. _ Crion organized new embedding_

[Chong]

While I agree that it would be nice to see a more even spread across all weapon types, I really don't like your suggested changes to the TOW missile.

I personally am guilty of using the TOW almost exlusively. Although I would argue that it isn't becuase it's overpowerd it's because it's FUN.
It is without question the most enjoyable weapon I can think of in a multiplayer game.

Sending a rocket flying across the map only to detonate it round a corner and kill someone trying to escape or somethng similarly epic just FEELS GOOD. It makes me smile everytime I get a kill with it.

I would like to point to the sharpshooter as an example. The sabot does significantly more damage than a TOW but I don't use it because simply shooting someone is boring by comparison. It's not about it being the best damage, it's about the fun factor.

I understand the quest for balance but it must NEVER interfere with FUN. It would be easy to make a perfectly balanced game where all the weapons deal the same damage and have the same mechanics. It's alot harder to create a fun, tactile and engaging weapon such as the TOW.

I would suggest that instead of removing mechanics from weapons, new mechanics be introduced to the weapons that feel lacking with the goal of making them more responsive to player input. That way the game remains skill based. Less about damage values and fire rates and more about player dessicions and actions.

In short, making a popular gun less enjoyable is a poor way to get people to try the other guns.
The goal should be to make the underplayed guns more fun to use than those currently in use.

Thanks
Chong

[Kheldras]

As nice as it is written.. its only a cry for nerf..

Why not simple delete the Rev-GL_  Jeez.. you write great, but a masked cry for nerf is stil only a cry for nerf.

Edited by Kheldras, February 24 2013 - 02:21 PM.

[Lorenzitto]

worst thing is that the introduction of reaper unbalanced everything is more messed than before, any mech even if Cupcake or any other heavy class mech can be killed in less than 10 seconds,
I tried using the rental reaper against a scout but I've got busted in a moment, obviously.
Is like the rock-paper-scissor balancing that went out at game release is totally broken now,
or we need new weapons usable on any mech class, or another mech type.

Edited by Lorenzitto, February 24 2013 - 02:39 PM.

[Guiotine]

Kheldras, on February 24 2013 - 02:15 PM, said:

As nice as it is written.. its only a cry for nerf..

Why not simple delete the Rev-GL_  Jeez.. you write great, but a masked cry for nerf is stil only a cry for nerf.

while at its core the OP may be calling for nerfs, it is more than just a "X too stronk, nerf plox" statement. It goes into an in-depth analysis of why X and Y dont work with Z gun, and what could be changed to make iit work better. Calling it only a cry for a nerf is a bit of an understatement, especially since most such cries are simply " This weapon is too strong, it needs a nerf!" without going really in depth to the problem. What I really like about this thread (aside from all the RP ) is that several people really go in depth as to what works in a weapon and what does not.

Edited by Guiotine, February 24 2013 - 04:58 PM.

[AsianJoyKiller]

Kheldras, on February 24 2013 - 02:15 PM, said:

As nice as it is written.. its only a cry for nerf..

Why not simple delete the Rev-GL_  Jeez.. you write great, but a masked cry for nerf is stil only a cry for nerf.

You should reread it carefully.
That is a gross misrepresentation of the message that Conquistador is putting forth.

[Conquistador]

Guiotine, on February 24 2013 - 04:50 PM, said:

Kheldras, on February 24 2013 - 02:15 PM, said:

As nice as it is written.. its only a cry for nerf..

Why not simple delete the Rev-GL_  Jeez.. you write great, but a masked cry for nerf is stil only a cry for nerf.

while at its core the OP may be calling for nerfs, it is more than just a "X too stronk, nerf plox" statement. It goes into an in-depth analysis of why X and Y dont work with Z gun, and what could be changed to make iit work better. Calling it only a cry for a nerf is a bit of an understatement, especially since most such cries are simply " This weapon is too strong, it needs a nerf!" without going really in depth to the problem. What I really like about this thread (aside from all the RP ) is that several people really go in depth as to what works in a weapon and what does not.

I love you guys. I barely even need to answer this.

But just for the sake of argument: Consider REV-GL is currently the only fully-auto explosive weapon in the game, and its area denial capability is incomparable. The weapon has no equal, or anything that can match it pound-for-pound, and when it's a weapon that rewards nothing but automatic explosive spam, the ratio between player skill-to-use and rewards-of-successful use need to be brought closer in line. It is simply does what it does far too easily. I'm just trying to level the playing field here, based mainly on the idea that is a weapon behaves like another weapon, it shouldn't drastically fall into a best-of-class category (in this case it is probably the best Class V automatic in the game right now, when damage, AOE and heat generation are taken into account).

Chong, on February 24 2013 - 11:09 AM, said:

In short, making a popular gun less enjoyable is a poor way to get people to try the other guns.

... I'm fairly certain plenty of the veterans would find the spiralling TOW mechanic extremely fun, specifically because once you learned to control the TOW spiral, you get even more utility out of the weapon than a pure railgun analog. This is especially true of the closed beta testers who actually learned how to use the helix on the TOW to target enemies around corners (back before they changed it to the extremely straight-firing pinpoint accurate version we know and love today). None of my suggestions have been tailored towards making weapons less fun, just to bring them closer in line with other weapon sets.

Edited by Conquistador, February 24 2013 - 07:15 PM.

[draco7891]

Conquistador, on February 24 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

But just for the sake of argument: Consider REV-GL is currently the only fully-auto explosive weapon in the game, and its area denial capability is incomparable. The weapon has no equal, or anything that can match it pound-for-pound,

Hey, Conq. You should try the Rev-GL now. It's been nerfed exactly how you wanted it to be, with extra heat gen. Guess what happened_

RevGL + GL = 1500 damage over 10 seconds. 12 Rev shots, 4 Grenades.

Charged HEAT cannon + GL = 2700 damage over 25 seconds. 12 HEAT, 10 Grenades.

--

RevGL alone (no mods): 23 grenades to overheat. 18.9 seconds to overheat. Total damage 1725, DPS 91.27

The HEAT+GL up there gets 108 DPS. For 25 seconds. And a bigger splash radius. And no explosion delay. And no lobbing arc. And no bouncing issues.

What happened_ The HEAT became the area-denial weapon of choice. Along with the corner-peek weapon of choice. And the splash damage weapon of choice. And the heat-free weapon of choice.

So, basically, never take anything but HEAT. Ever.

(or nerf HEAT, preferably with additional heat generation. Like Draco told you to do, ya goober.)

Draco

Edited by draco7891, February 25 2013 - 09:06 AM.

[Conquistador]

draco7891, on February 25 2013 - 12:39 AM, said:

Conquistador, on February 24 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

But just for the sake of argument: Consider REV-GL is currently the only fully-auto explosive weapon in the game, and its area denial capability is incomparable. The weapon has no equal, or anything that can match it pound-for-pound,

Hey, Conq. You should try the Rev-GL now. It's been nerfed exactly how you wanted it to be, with extra heat gen. Guess what happened_

RevGL + GL = 1500 damage over 10 seconds. 12 Rev shots, 4 Grenades.

Charged HEAT cannon + GL = 2700 damage over 25 seconds. 12 HEAT, 10 Grenades.

--

RevGL alone (no mods): 23 grenades to overheat. 18.9 seconds to overheat. Total damage 1275, DPS 91.27

The HEAT+GL up there gets 108 DPS. For 25 seconds. And a bigger splash radius. And no explosion delay. And no lobbing arc. And no bouncing issues.

What happened_ The HEAT became the area-denial weapon of choice. Along with the corner-peek weapon of choice. And the splash damage weapon of choice. And the heat-free weapon of choice.

So, basically, never take anything but HEAT. Ever.

(or nerf HEAT, preferably with additional heat generation. Like Draco told you to do, ya goober.)

Draco

I'll defer the rev-gl to more playtesting in a competitive setting, and hopefully seeing it in fight club's tourney may help to form a final judgement on the weapon. This being said, I love how they removed the magnetic effect of the projectiles, so all changes to its weapon character were warranted, I can assure you! It still seems fairly good at area denial when used by a skilled player assaulting the AA, so I'm loving the changes. It was arguably the easiest explosive weapon to use in the game, previously. Now it seems much more aligned with current weapons balance. (Also my comments on the revgl were mainly to address the fact that someone was condensing the entirety of project PARIS inti a call for nerf. I realize I pretty much got what I asked for. Which is excellent.)

I do agree HEAT is now the area denial weapon of choice, but I'm confused as to why you're still not considering a nerf to its splash radius. Heat buildup is never a problem at higher levels of play, because heat management is one of the easiest skills to master in HAWKEN. Especially considering sometimes it's better to let yourself overheat as the restart time is so minute.

But HEAT cannon needs a nerf either way. Except maybe on grenadier. I did like your comments on HEAT being designed for use on C mech, imbalancing them on lighter chassis. I would live to see a mini-HEAT analog on scout ( and to a lesser extent, infiltrator) at any rate, especially one with a smaller splash radius.

Edited by Conquistador, February 25 2013 - 08:54 AM.