93 replies to this topic

[_Caffeine_]

145154151164145, on March 11 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:

Easy fix for eoc. Reduce direct hit damage greatly around 30% and mine damage slightly, possibly around 10%, but increase the mines detonation trigger AOE and slightly increase explosion radius.  As it is now the mines detection AOE, though buffed, is still very small and that's why direct hits are more beneficial as it is guaranteed damage.  It also wouldn't hurt to put a subtle arc in its flight path (something like the KLA grenade)  so that the mines can actually fall on the ground at very distant ranges instead of flying straight over terrain.

I would agree to an arc in its travel.  I shouldn't be able to put 200 damage on a sharpie from across the map, even if he is just standing there.

[ShadowWarg]

_Caffeine_, on March 12 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

145154151164145, on March 11 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:

Easy fix for eoc. Reduce direct hit damage greatly around 30% and mine damage slightly, possibly around 10%, but increase the mines detonation trigger AOE and slightly increase explosion radius.  As it is now the mines detection AOE, though buffed, is still very small and that's why direct hits are more beneficial as it is guaranteed damage.  It also wouldn't hurt to put a subtle arc in its flight path (something like the KLA grenade)  so that the mines can actually fall on the ground at very distant ranges instead of flying straight over terrain.

I would agree to an arc in its travel.  I shouldn't be able to put 200 damage on a sharpie from across the map, even if he is just standing there.

Then I sort of feel that The Tow and the Heat should also have an ark.

The nerf in damage seems like a good Idea, just not to the extreme of 210->150 = direct hit and  150->120 for mines.

[RentAKnight]

My problem with the approach here, is that the OP reads like a combat simulator, plugging in numbers, hitting go and saying hmm something stands out as an outlier.

No where in your math are you accounting for reliability or forgivingness of one weapon vs another.  If you miss even half of your MIRV shot your DPS falls off a cliff, while if you miss 1-2 shots of the AR your dps isn't drastically affected.  The TOW and GL can be remote detonated so there is a reliability to their damage.  It is quite difficult to completely dodge a TOW or GL, while if you dodge at the right time, it is quite easy to COMPLETELY dodge a MIRV shot (yes even vs good pilots).

Until you come up with a way to account for reliability of the dps, your approach should not be given too much merit.  This is my biggest problem with all the number crunching that a select few individuals do on this forum.  You cannot use a numbers simulator to justify balance.

Edited by RentAKnight, March 12 2013 - 08:14 AM.

[AsianJoyKiller]

RentAKnight, on March 12 2013 - 08:09 AM, said:

My problem with the approach here, is that the OP reads like a combat simulator, plugging in numbers, hitting go and saying hmm something stands out as an outlier.

No where in your math are you accounting for reliability or forgivingness of one weapon vs another.  If you miss even half of your MIRV shot your DPS falls off a cliff, while if you miss 1-2 shots of the AR your dps isn't drastically affected.  The TOW and GL can be remote detonated so there is a reliability to their damage.  It is quite difficult to completely dodge a TOW or GL, while if you dodge at the right time, it is quite easy to COMPLETELY dodge a MIRV shot (yes even vs good pilots).

Until you come up with a way to account for reliability of the dps, your approach should not be given too much merit.  This is my biggest problem with all the number crunching that a select few individuals do on this forum.  You cannot use a numbers simulator to justify balance.

Balancing basing on what happens at maximum potential and under optimal circumstances is better than basing balance on "WHOOPS I MISSED!"

[RentAKnight]

AsianJoyKiller, on March 12 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

Balancing basing on what happens at maximum potential and under optimal circumstances is better than basing balance on "WHOOPS I MISSED!"

What_ No.  Balance should be around gameplay.  In my games, I miss, especially when using the less forgiving weapons.  I have a feeling other people miss too.

As others have mentioned in this thread pre patch the EOC was impossible to hit with for max damage.   Did anyone call it OP then, even though it posted ridiculous numbers_  No, it was UP, because it was impossible to hit with.  You have to account for damage consistency before spouting off that the damage is too high.

Edited by RentAKnight, March 12 2013 - 09:11 AM.

[AsianJoyKiller]

RentAKnight, on March 12 2013 - 09:06 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on March 12 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

Balancing basing on what happens at maximum potential and under optimal circumstances is better than basing balance on "WHOOPS I MISSED!"

What_ No.  Balance should be around gameplay.  As others have mentioned in this thread pre patch the EOC was impossible to hit with for max damage.   Did anyone call it OP then, even though it posted ridiculous numbers_  No, it was UP, because it was impossible to hit with.  You have to account for damage consistency before spouting off that the damage is too high.

Maximum potential and optimal circumstance are gameplay.

The logic you're using can justify the inclusion of 1hk weapons and other ridiculously high bursts based on just making something difficult to use.

And you need to realize, we're not top tier players. We are not the best out there. There are true professionals who could take the old EOC and have dominated with it.

You also can't just ignore the potential of what happens when things line up right.
You have to think "What happens if..._" especially when talking about things like the MIRV. Sure, you miss sometimes, and yeah, you get partial hits too. But it's not exactly a rare event that you land the full salvo.

[RentAKnight]

AsianJoyKiller, on March 12 2013 - 09:24 AM, said:

And you need to realize, we're not top tier players. We are not the best out there. There are true professionals who could take the old EOC and have dominated with it.

Until this happens it's all conjecture.  This game has a turn cap that nerfs twitch aiming.  You make it sound like the limitations of aming will somehow be overcome if these "top tier" players try the game out and put some time into it.  

What makes you think that the current good players aren't "top tier"_  Because they miss_  Have you tried twitch aiming in Hawken_  

I have two top tier quake 3 friends that tried Hawken and immediately said no because it ruins their aiming in other twitch games.

Edited by RentAKnight, March 12 2013 - 09:36 AM.

[N0stalgia]

I tend to think that the devs are getting pretty close on balancing all the weapons. They are too bursty now, but instead of changing all the values for the weapons again, just up the base armor of all the mechs. Maybe A class should start with 600 armor or even 650. Then scale it up from there for the other classes.

Sounds like a lot of effort to rebalance all the guns. Very simple to just up a mech's lasting potential via armor.

[Daronicus]

AsianJoyKiller, on March 12 2013 - 09:24 AM, said:

RentAKnight, on March 12 2013 - 09:06 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on March 12 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

Balancing basing on what happens at maximum potential and under optimal circumstances is better than basing balance on "WHOOPS I MISSED!"

What_ No.  Balance should be around gameplay.  As others have mentioned in this thread pre patch the EOC was impossible to hit with for max damage.   Did anyone call it OP then, even though it posted ridiculous numbers_  No, it was UP, because it was impossible to hit with.  You have to account for damage consistency before spouting off that the damage is too high.

Maximum potential and optimal circumstance are gameplay.

The logic you're using can justify the inclusion of 1hk weapons and other ridiculously high bursts based on just making something difficult to use.

And you need to realize, we're not top tier players. We are not the best out there. There are true professionals who could take the old EOC and have dominated with it.

You also can't just ignore the potential of what happens when things line up right.
You have to think "What happens if..._" especially when talking about things like the MIRV. Sure, you miss sometimes, and yeah, you get partial hits too. But it's not exactly a rare event that you land the full salvo.

I'll agree that optimal conditions should be considered, but the ease with which those conditions are accomplished should also be considered.  Let's not create a false dichotomy here.  I mean, with optimal conditions, where every single one of everyone's shots hit, flak Brawlers should dominate flak Scouts, right_  But we know this isn't the case, because it's a lot harder for the Brawler to hit every shot than it is for the Scout.  Also, what is meant by optimal conditions_  Do you mean every shot by both players hit_  But it's possible (though unlikely) to dodge every single shot from my opponent, even while landing all of mine!  Surely that is truly the optimal outcome of an engagement.  Should we determine balance by this outlier of a situation_  If it happens often enough, something needs to be changed (like, say, the ease of use of the weapon or the ease of dodging), but if it truly is an outlier that nobody can do regularly or "on command" against equally skilled players, it should be treated as what it is:  an exceptional case without significant impact on the outcome of engagements.

[N0stalgia]

N0stalgia, on March 12 2013 - 09:51 AM, said:

I tend to think that the devs are getting pretty close on balancing all the weapons. They are too bursty now, but instead of changing all the values for the weapons again, just up the base armor of all the mechs. Maybe A class should start with 600 armor or even 650. Then scale it up from there for the other classes.

Sounds like a lot of effort to rebalance all the guns. Very simple to just up a mech's lasting potential via armor.

Great idea, Nost!

[Sylhiri]

N0stalgia, on March 12 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

Great idea, Nost!

Really_

XD

[v009]

Sylhiri, on March 12 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

N0stalgia, on March 12 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

Great idea, Nost!

Really_

XD

LOL. Both of you guys are funny.

[Akrium]

Seems I blanked out and forgot to follow my own thread. Let me go over some things here.

RentAKnight, on March 12 2013 - 08:09 AM, said:

My problem with the approach here, is that the OP reads like a combat simulator, plugging in numbers, hitting go and saying hmm something stands out as an outlier.

No where in your math are you accounting for reliability or forgivingness of one weapon vs another.  If you miss even half of your MIRV shot your DPS falls off a cliff, while if you miss 1-2 shots of the AR your dps isn't drastically affected.  The TOW and GL can be remote detonated so there is a reliability to their damage.  It is quite difficult to completely dodge a TOW or GL, while if you dodge at the right time, it is quite easy to COMPLETELY dodge a MIRV shot (yes even vs good pilots).

Until you come up with a way to account for reliability of the dps, your approach should not be given too much merit.  This is my biggest problem with all the number crunching that a select few individuals do on this forum.  You cannot use a numbers simulator to justify balance.

Lets look at the vulcan and what it "used" to do. It got nerfed because getting into point blank  position and abusing it's damage turned out be fairly easy in the end. But it wasn't that bad previously because not enough people fought in close quarter combat and a lot of people were turned off by its lack of range. Next thing you know, people figure out how to use it to its full potential and bam.. OP gun.

People were already figuring out the whole EOC burst op thing long before the latest patch was told was coming to us and what was being effected by it. I was one shotting people with the eoc hellfires at range. Ask Toryne if you don't believe me. I caught him on titan while he was in his A class mech at 300-400 meters with a full load of eoc and hellfires. This is possible. The fact that it IS possible means that at some point people will be consistent at doing it.

Like if we go back and look at Counter Strike and look at the AWP. Did you remember when it could shoot through 10 walls and 6 doors and nick a persons toe and kill them_ I do.. but that was fine because it took "skill" to use the weapon. Next thing you know people figured this out and they learned how to use the gun in cqc situations and just abuse the fuzzy bunny out of it because the skill level of the players rose. Enter a nerf to the AWP.

Again we have to look at the potential of the gun, not the skill required to use it. People will gain the skill to use it. And I am not half bad with the eoc because I spent a long time leveling my rocketeer and to have fun doing it I only used the EOC. I landed full pucks quite often, on good and bad players on the move and not on the move.

One thing you are also forgetting about the EOC is the "difficulty" of hitting a C class mech. It isn't there... Hitting a mech the size of some of the smaller states is not a challenge and quite often is funny knowing you will see their health just dip because of 1 charged round. I hardly lost to another C class mech while playing my rocketeer because the burst I had was too extreme.

So the "ease of use" for the gun is quite easy. If you use it as a mine laying gun now it is easy to land. If you use it as direct damage on C class mechs, it is easy to land. It is about using the gun to the potential it should be used. Also note that with my proposed changes it turns the gun from a 1.5s reload gun to a 1.1 s reload thus making it more forgiving to go for direct damage over mine laying. Similar to how you speak about the AR or SMC missing some bullets isn't the end of the world.

RentAKnight, on March 12 2013 - 09:06 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on March 12 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

Balancing basing on what happens at maximum potential and under optimal circumstances is better than basing balance on "WHOOPS I MISSED!"

What_ No.  Balance should be around gameplay.  In my games, I miss, especially when using the less forgiving weapons.  I have a feeling other people miss too.

As others have mentioned in this thread pre patch the EOC was impossible to hit with for max damage.   Did anyone call it OP then, even though it posted ridiculous numbers_  No, it was UP, because it was impossible to hit with.  You have to account for damage consistency before spouting off that the damage is too high.

Actually I called for a nerf to the damage before the last patch. And then really during the last patch. And now it has got to the point it seriously needs looked at and fixed. The whole complaint that people are saying is that the gun has gotten easier to use because of the mines. And that now because of the mines, it does too much damage. So people want to keep the burst but change the direct damage to much higher.. thus rewarding a "skill" shot over the utility of the gun's mine laying. Where as this WILL reduce the over all dps of the weapon, that doesn't actually solve the problem of it being too high for burst dmg if all of them land. A primary weapon that almost HALVES the armor on an A class is just too high. It is about game play and fairness vs omg I just love making people pop instantly.

Consider your avg player during the CBs.. consider it at launch of the OB.. consider it now... the skill levels have drastically increased even in this short amount of time. People will learn to master the EOC at some point. Why do we need to wait for someone to be a god at it before we balance it properly. Why can't we just see it will happen and fix it ahead of time so it isn't as broken.

RentAKnight, on March 12 2013 - 09:30 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on March 12 2013 - 09:24 AM, said:

And you need to realize, we're not top tier players. We are not the best out there. There are true professionals who could take the old EOC and have dominated with it.

Until this happens it's all conjecture.  This game has a turn cap that nerfs twitch aiming.  You make it sound like the limitations of aming will somehow be overcome if these "top tier" players try the game out and put some time into it.  

What makes you think that the current good players aren't "top tier"_  Because they miss_  Have you tried twitch aiming in Hawken_  

I have two top tier quake 3 friends that tried Hawken and immediately said no because it ruins their aiming in other twitch games.

All you are saying is that your friends don't like this game because they can't twitch. This effects the games they do play so they won't play Hawken. That is all..

What AJK is getting at is that none of us are gamer professionals that are making a living playing Hawken yet. When those people come about you will see things you wouldn't believe. Why_ Because someone sat down and spent the time gaining the skill to do what we consider "impossible" now. The game is still in it's infancy and we need to look down the road. Just because we are not there yet doesn't mean we shouldn't fix things that could be easily broken. Consider this like when strafe jumping was introduced to TFC. It took skill to master and was something that seriously changed game play in favor of those that knew how to do it. People eventually all learned how to do it though. The EOC will get abused by someone.. then everyone else will be like.. I gotta figure this out. Bam.. abused gun. That is all it takes.

And you can land all the EOC pucks on someone by simply leading the target at all times until the pucks are all out. Firing it is more about dragging your mouse and firing at the same time. It plays differently than the other weapons is all. That is a difference you see in players learning how to use the EOC properly and those that don't get it yet.

Daronicus, on March 12 2013 - 09:56 AM, said:

I'll agree that optimal conditions should be considered, but the ease with which those conditions are accomplished should also be considered.  Let's not create a false dichotomy here.  I mean, with optimal conditions, where every single one of everyone's shots hit, flak Brawlers should dominate flak Scouts, right_  But we know this isn't the case, because it's a lot harder for the Brawler to hit every shot than it is for the Scout.  Also, what is meant by optimal conditions_  Do you mean every shot by both players hit_  But it's possible (though unlikely) to dodge every single shot from my opponent, even while landing all of mine!  Surely that is truly the optimal outcome of an engagement.  Should we determine balance by this outlier of a situation_  If it happens often enough, something needs to be changed (like, say, the ease of use of the weapon or the ease of dodging), but if it truly is an outlier that nobody can do regularly or "on command" against equally skilled players, it should be treated as what it is:  an exceptional case without significant impact on the outcome of engagements.

I understand what you are getting at. But that also doesn't change the fact that the gun can do 210 damage in 1 shot. As many players have stated, it is not about the dps of the weapon when describing if it is good for the current burst style of game. It is about how much front loaded damage you can put out.

The front loaded damage of the EOC is too high.

Also people want to see the gun ONLY as a replacement to the HEAT. They want a god peek-a-boo weapon. The problem is the utility of the weapon was never about peek-a-boo but setting traps for people to walk into instead. The peeking is something you can totally avoid if you really want to. People just havn't figured it out yet, though some are getting it. Because what was one of the biggest complaints about it since the patch_ Omergerd I keep stepping on mines and taking dmg. That is from people using the gun more to it's potential than those going only for direct hits.

And so here is the WHOLE issue with the gun right now.

Some people feel the burst is too high.
Some feel because the mines work so well that the skill cap on the weapon is now too low and people are abusing their "skill" gun.
Some people feel it does too much burst AND is too easy to use for mines.

Problem is, most of the people that believe the mines are too much totally don't care about the burst. And don't understand that any gun, no matter the "skill", shouldn't have the potential to do that.

Skill is something that is constantly changing. It used to take "skill" to time your tows and mid air someone. Now it is a joke. Don't you remember WHY we all wanted feathering to the explosions. It used to take "skill" to use the HEAT. Then people figured it out as well and abused it.

People simply cannot argue that a gun takes skill to use as a reason for it's damage output. Skill will turn into normal every day use at some point and thus not be skillful at all. It just takes time.

[Akrium]

waftycrank, on March 12 2013 - 05:59 AM, said:

(Won’t vote in uservoice.  Unnecessary tool only fragments intelligent discourse.  Forum analogue with +1s not better than actual forum with +1s.)

[HWK]TJ put this up because he spent an entire day sifting through the forums to better the game for us. He was looking for what people felt were the major issues so he could in fact do things to better the community and game. Thus he was shown another game using the uservoice option and was thrilled because it seriously shows what the community wants in one nice place. There doesn't have to be hours spent looking for it, it is all right in one spot.

The current forums do no have any functionality to make the Dev's lives any easier for finding out what we want. TJ wants to consider making the uservoice part of our current forums if it does well. In it's current state it is only a test to see if people will jump onto the idea of it.

It is a good idea. I really hope you reconsider your idea on the whole thing and go there and voice your opinion in trying to help our game be better. It is a tool to make the devs respond to what we want to see in the game. Though, even if we vote something crazy in there like adding ponies, it doesn't mean they will add it. But they will see what we are voting up as something we feel as a community is important.

Also you can supply comments in said ideas. Which does allow for discussion of the topic in general.

Edited by Akrium, March 13 2013 - 05:15 AM.

[Akrium]

waftycrank, on March 13 2013 - 06:44 AM, said:

Akrium, on March 13 2013 - 05:14 AM, said:

TJ wants to consider making the uservoice part of our current forums if it does well. In it's current state it is only a test to see if people will jump onto the idea of it.

Forum integration would improve matters.  Click ‘Vote Up’ on Suggestion OP.  Feeds into uservoice-esque metric.  Keeps everything central.  No need for fragmented discussion.  (Discussion should be more value than +1s.)  If that happens I’m in.  With bells on.

We do have to have a little faith in the devs too. They have a goal in mind and won't just change their mind because everyone wants it.

I do understand it isn't as good as as having a discussion on it. But discussions tend to go on tangents in the forums. This is less discussion and more.. hey this needs looked at, Agree / Disagree.

Discussions can happen on the regular forums about said topic. Thus I linked the uservoice at the end of my topic to help navigate people to the issue and hopefully vote for it if they found my ideas convincing enough or just that TTK needs tuned better on a whole.

[RentAKnight]

Akrium, on March 13 2013 - 05:06 AM, said:

All you are saying is that your friends don't like this game because they can't twitch. This effects the games they do play so they won't play Hawken. That is all..

What AJK is getting at is that none of us are gamer professionals that are making a living playing Hawken yet. When those people come about you will see things you wouldn't believe.

What I am saying is that Hawken has hard limits as to the level of aiming that can be achieved.   I played some half life death match last night for kicks just to remember what it was like to play a twitch aiming game with unimpeded mouse control:



Twitch aiming like what I demonstrate in this video of half life is NOT POSSIBLE in Hawken.  I cannot see how anyone in the future will be able to miraculously overcome the HARD limits on crosshair control that exist in Hawken.  Go watch one of my Hawken gameplay videos and keep in mind I'm playing at 120 fps and still struggle to land shots because I am constantly fighting the inhibited mouse control.

What I am arguing is that hitscan weapons are balanced BECAUSE of these hard aiming limits.  I've tried to get other top tier gamers to try Hawken and these HARD LIMITS immediately turn them off, and away from Hawken.  

AJK's rebuttal is all conjecture.  Please get a top tier gamer to try Hawken and show me how they are going to get around the limited crosshair control, because my experience says that it's not possible.

Because of these hard limits, high damage, slow fire rate, hitscan weapons that are not forgiving when you miss, are balanced compared to lower damage projectiles that have forgiving explosion damage.

The hitscan weapons all require careful aiming while with projectiles one can take on a rushed approach and still hit for viable damage.

Edited by RentAKnight, March 13 2013 - 08:53 AM.

[AsianJoyKiller]

Hey RentaKnight, guess what_
Twitch aiming is not the only kind of aiming. People who are better at tracking and leading are going to have an easy time overcoming the turn rate cap.

And did you just imply that Hawken hitscan weapons require precision_
I'm sorry, but have you seen the size of the hitboxes in this game lately_
Have you noticed the amount of spray & pray hitscan weapons_

You really don't have to be that precise...

[RentAKnight]

So I thought I'd look at another DM game that has decent TTK and a variety of weapons and weapon types, Quake 3 (quakelive).  I am very familiar with how each weapon performs, when it's used, and in which situation each weapon is stronger:


+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ Weapon ¦ No. ¦ Abr. ¦  Dmg   ¦ DPS    ¦ Reload(ms) ¦
+-----------------------+-----+------+--------+------------------------¦
¦ Gauntlet   ¦  1  ¦  G   ¦   50   ¦ 400    ¦ 400 ¦
¦ Machine Gun    ¦  2  ¦ MG   ¦ 5   ¦  50    ¦ 100 ¦
¦ Shotgun    ¦  3  ¦ SG   ¦  100   ¦ 100    ¦ 1000 ¦
¦ Grenade Launcher   ¦  4  ¦ GL   ¦  100   ¦ 125    ¦ 800 ¦
¦ Rocket Launcher    ¦  5  ¦ RL   ¦  100*  ¦ 125    ¦ 800 ¦
¦ Lightning Gun ¦  6  ¦ LG   ¦ 7-7-7**¦ 140    ¦   50 ¦
¦ Rail gun   ¦  7  ¦ RG   ¦   80   ¦  53    ¦ 1500 ¦
¦ Plasma Gun ¦  8  ¦ PG   ¦   20   ¦ 200    ¦ 100 ¦
¦ BFG    ¦  9  ¦ BFG  ¦ ¦    ¦ 200 ¦
¦ Grapple    ¦ 10  ¦   ¦ ¦    ¦ ¦
¦ Nail Gun   ¦ 11  ¦ NG   ¦  100   ¦    ¦ ¦
¦ Proximity Mines    ¦ 12  ¦ PG   ¦  100   ¦    ¦ ¦
¦ Chain Gun ¦ 13  ¦ CG   ¦ ¦ 80-160*** ¦ ¦
+-----------------------+-----+------+--------+-----------+------------+

dmg=max damage per round (SSG has 11 damage per pellet in each round)
dps=damage per second if it with 100% accuracy
*RL max 42 on self splash (non direct/full on hit), max 84 on other players
**LG damage is 3 numbers as the shaft is in 3 sections, close-mid-long range
***(80 during 1sec of spinup, 160 at full speed, assuming all bullets hit)


Interesting things to note, especially if you are familiar with the weapons.  Keep in mind player health starting is 100 and you can acquire up to 200 armor for effective HP of 300.

The lightning gun has a max range close to 90m and is a consistant fire weapon like the AR, 50ms reload time.  Even though the plasma gun has a higher DPS, the lighting gun is preferred EVERY TIME because it is easier to aim ( the plasma gun is projectile based, like the EOC).  The Plasma gun is balanced in Quake because of it's difficulty to aim consistently.  Quake is a tried and true proven game that players have competed in for millions of dollars.

The rail gun and the shotgun are the only real burst damage weapons.  The shotgun has a huge spread and only hits for 100 at very close ranges.  The rail gun in original q3 used to hit for 100 but it was lowered in live to 80 because it is pin point accurate at all ranges, considered OP.   The rail gun is balanced by a very long CD so it is very unforgiving if you miss.

The rocket launcher does 84 max on splash so when you miss you don't hit for 100, but still hit.

Edited by RentAKnight, March 13 2013 - 01:28 PM.