215 replies to this topic

[Goyo]

curlupanddie, on March 28 2013 - 10:36 PM, said:

I find this topic 8 pages later, dividing folks into two (very familiar) parties.

Those that want a strategic, team based game, with all mechs evenly matched 1v1 for equally skilled pilots, allowing for "the beautiful dance".

And those that want burst damage, run and gun twitch play where they can get high kill streaks and be one man armies.

Currently Hawken offers both, but in practice and in the numbers, burst is king right now.

Indeed i agree... the summation of this thread is that there are people who want Hawken to be like every other shooter out there.

I my self found something unique and different.  I like that.

With that said,  I am in the camp that Hawken has been ans hopeful continues to be the alternative to modern day  FPS.  That is thier nitch.  If Hawken tried to be like modern shoooters.. it is dead.  They do nt have the resources to go head to head with the twitch shooters that are out there.

So why not capitalize on the strengths that hawken does have_  Acceptable engine .. check.

As a game enthisuast you wished I listed more positives.

Map design is sub par... balance is sub par..I am crazy to still care about this game... but I do.

Some sort o witch doctor voodoo as you do has me in a trans and all I see is Hawken.

[Bowmangr]

I bothered to log in and write in this thread because I find it is spot on as to what is the stae of Hawken right now.

Hawken IMHO is in a crossroads right now. It has to decide which road to take.

On one hand we have the {extremely boring and standardized} twitch shooter the likes of Call of Duty with the only twist being that the players are piloting mechs. I don't need to describe it in detail. Short kill times, twitch gameplay, mindless action, less strategy etc.
It's obvious that this road in my opinion the worst thing that can happen in this game. I regard Hawken players as more thinking tacticians than mindless dexterity/twitch gamers. This is the crowd that this game managed to attract and these are the ones posting here that they feel that the game has worsened over time.

On the other hand we have the MECH game. You know, the one we all wanted to play_ The one with the longer kill times, more TACTICAL choices, less twitchy gameplay and so on. The one were team tactics and cooperation provides way WAY better results than running around shooting everyone in a chaotic mess until you drop too from a random bullet/missile/alpha strike.


Hawken begun as a MECH game and gradually tilted towards the Call of Duty road. It's not there yet and I surely hope that it never gets there.
So we are now in the crossroads. The devs are trying to find the game's direction I believe and they do well in testing tweaks and new ideas. I don't want to appear as whining about a BETA version of a game. I merely want to express my opinion on the matter.

I believe that this game should try to stay away from the twitch crowd because not only it can't compete, it will manage to scare away its main players. You know, the ones who loved what it was back then_ Exactly.

Even if you lose a few 'twitchers', you will keep your main fan base which is way more important than increasing the player base with free to play gamers that will get bored quickly and move on to the next CoDfest game out there. You may even get to appeal to some old Mechwarrior fans, like me, who want a bit more action sometimes instead of turnbased gameplay for a change.

I feel that you can get a few good ideas from Mechwarrior Online, even if that game is broken for me. They have a few neat ideas that should apply to any mech game.

What do I mean_ Here you go:

1} Armored mechs should be HARD to kill. If you see a few Mechwarrior Online gameplay videos, you'll immediately notice how hard it is to kill a mech. They also have damage locations which is also a pretty good idea although I understand that Hawken is too far into it development to suddenly implement damage locations.

Mech combat should slow down. I like Hawken's more straighforward combat than Mechwarrior Online but I do NOT like the twitchy attitude that it got these two last months.

Easier way to do it is by increasing the mech's resilience. Even without using damage locations, you can make the combat feel like two huge armored mech fighting each other instead of papercraft miniatures ripping each other with way powerful weapons.


2} We are piloting a mech. Again, you need to give us the feel of piloting a mech. I don't want to feel that the mech is responding as a human. It should be slow. Slow turn times, slow acceleration times, slow. Some A-class mech especially behave like a human being. This is not right. Right now, I'm pretty sure that some twitchers are cringing in their seats. Oh well...

3} How about adding some effects to your weapons_ For example, one should be armor piercing and do damage, another could make a mech overheat with fire, another could make it shudder and make it difficult for its pilot to operate properly and so on. I do have to use the Mechwarrior Online example again since is the closest we have to another mech game. They have weapons that use AMMO, they have lasers that shoot a continuous bolt of energy which cannot be stopped for a time delay, you have to wait it out, they have No-Respawn gameplay which along with increasing the Mech' hitpoints will also provide way more strategic and even tactical choices to players. They have to co-operate instead of going head-on to die without fear. The ability of respawn tends to do that to you.

I come from a strategy videogame/boardgame background and I'm fully aware that many players here are shooter players and nothing else, so all this may sound as bad suggestions, and it may very well be that way. I won't argue about that.

All I know is that, me, a strategy player, played and more importantly LOVED Hawken for its action, gritty combat and weaponry and the fun that I had without having to put up with immature twitchers.

So please Adhesive, do not compete with Call of Duty, compete with Mechwarrior Online please. You have a good product here, it IS better than MWO but will not be if you start to look at the CoD way. BETA feedback gives you a chance to make things right.

You are on the crossroad. Choose the more gritty, wargamey strategic approach and not the unrealistic, twitch, instant gratification way.
Gaming is hurting because of the instant gratification crowd. Let's stay on the other side please.


P.S. I've stopped playing Hawken as much as I did before mainly because it seems that I play a CoD version of Hawken right now. I'm hoping for a more stretegic version with the upcoming patches in order to get back in the game.

[Goyo]

Thanks Bowmaner... I too want a FPS that currently is not offered out there in the gaming market.  Your thoughts illustrate that others think the same.

Cheers!|

[FussyBadger]

I haven't played too long, but I enjoy Hawken in brief spurts. About an hour on a weeknight. Maybe that's the advantage of having a job that wears me out and a wife that I love to spend time with - I don't play games anywhere near as much as I used to so I don't burn out as quickly.

I have an arc with most multiplayer games. Early on, when I'm learning all the maps and gameplay nuance, I enjoy myself. It's easy to see how I can improve. The better I get and more experience I have, the more difficult it becomes to ignore the issues that are beyond my control, like flaws on the game, cruddy connections, etc. My competitive side takes over and I'm no longer having fun unless I'm winning - but, on principle, I won't exploit gameplay imbalances just to do so. So I win less and decide I have better entertainment options. Different games, hop on the motorcycle, hang out with the lady, read a book, etc.

In a game last night, one of the dominating players said the game was boring, too campy, and imbalanced. He made this remark in the midst of three games where he spammed grenades and mines all over creation. The way he played either demonstrated or created an environment that reflected those things he complained about. When someone else pointed that out, asking why he used an imbalanced mech if he felt that the imbalance ruined the game, the guy remarked, "Look at my score." It's always disappointing to see people fuzzy bunny where they eat.

[Goyo]

FussyBadger, on March 29 2013 - 02:41 AM, said:

I haven't played too long, but I enjoy Hawken in brief spurts. About an hour on a weeknight. Maybe that's the advantage of having a job that wears me out and a wife that I love to spend time with - I don't play games anywhere near as much as I used to so I don't burn out as quickly.

I have an arc with most multiplayer games. Early on, when I'm learning all the maps and gameplay nuance, I enjoy myself. It's easy to see how I can improve. The better I get and more experience I have, the more difficult it becomes to ignore the issues that are beyond my control, like flaws on the game, cruddy connections, etc. My competitive side takes over and I'm no longer having fun unless I'm winning - but, on principle, I won't exploit gameplay imbalances just to do so. So I win less and decide I have better entertainment options. Different games, hop on the motorcycle, hang out with the lady, read a book, etc.

In a game last night, one of the dominating players said the game was boring, too campy, and imbalanced. He made this remark in the midst of three games where he spammed grenades and mines all over creation. The way he played either demonstrated or created an environment that reflected those things he complained about. When someone else pointed that out, asking why he used an imbalanced mech if he felt that the imbalance ruined the game, the guy remarked, "Look at my score." It's always disappointing to see people fuzzy bunny where they eat.

Currently the Grenadier is at the bottom of the power curve.. so in my opinion as lame of a response as his was it is somewhat justified.  At leas he wasn't rocking a Raider or SS.

[FussyBadger]

A few points to Bowmanr - First, Hawken has no business trying to provide the same gameplay experience as Mechwarrior Online. I don't want these two to become the CoD and BF3 of mech land. That's not a win for gamers and its certainly a radical departure from Hawken's intent.

Mechs can be relatively fast. Read the Hawken GC - there's reason for the limited bursts of speed. I can see an argument for less fuel, but not gimping the speed altogether.  Anyways, it sure seems like you fire up Hawken hoping that it will play like MWO. Doesn't it make more sense to fire up MWO instead_

Second, the TTK comparison to CoD is an exaggeration. CoD has a large number of ways for a lone player to kill another player in a fraction of a second. I haven't experienced that same TTK in Hawken from a solo mech in my A Class on a remotely regular basis, if at all. It's not the same at all. I rarely feel like I got hit by a freight train and had no chance to react or survive. It's not at CoD levels and I will be surprised if it gets any closer than it already is.

Finally, if becoming a faster paced game is the worst thing that could happen to Hawken, I urge you to exercise more creativity and bring some fun into your imagination. Imagine if Hawken became mechs versus endangered pandas. Or "Hawken: the game of mechanized dish washing." Or a kaleidoscopic Japanese karaoke game featuring dancing mechs. How about if dying actually gave you an electric shock in the junk with every death_ Those are way worse fates than a faster pace!

[FussyBadger]

Goyo, on March 29 2013 - 02:47 AM, said:

Currently the Grenadier is at the bottom of the power curve.. so in my opinion as lame of a response as his was it is somewhat justified.  At leas he wasn't rocking a Raider or SS.

If I recall, he was using an Infiltrator. Either way, he used the weapon that he specifically complained about (EOC) and used it and the grenade launcher in a manner that reinforced the gameplay experience that he didn't want to have. His team camped an area and  and he would spam the choke point - only rarely leaving to go invisible and alpha strike someone. It's not a perfect tactic, but the players on my team fell victim to it over and over.

[Goyo]

Thanks fuzzy,  I use my imagination that Yen Lo Wang might be sawing us down withh is auto cannon on solaris but that still does not change that fact that I fell in love with one game and it has moved in the opposite direction.

I stil feel the ONLY thing that seperates Hakwen from other options in the market is responsive combat. The other options have moved to MMO combat.  I have dismissed MMO FPS combat for a number of fundamentally broken features.

This thread is a declaration that I do not want a mimic or clone of FPS already out there and I hope Hawken moves away from that.

[FussyBadger]

I appreciate that, Goyo - my response was directed to Bowmanr. I just used his name instead of quoting his block of text in doing so.

I agree in that I hope Hawken backs off the direction many players see. The TTK is definitely shorter than I would like in some cases.

[the_Sprawl]

I think part of the problem with Hawken right now is that its currently standing og two chairs.

One chair is the damagechair from Unreal Tournament where any weapon can kill you in less then three secs.

The other chair is the mobilitychair from MWO.

It doesn't take a genius to see those two can't be easily combined. Atleast not with the current health and repair system. It's literally a retreat and repair fest from time to time. If you're piloting a B-mech and you start a fight with an A-mech with your health reduced to 500, you're at a disadvantage. Bigger target, less mobile.

The game tries to position itself between MWO and the standard twitch shooter. But it can't be both at the same time.
The devs must choose, base the game on ridiculous powerbursts, then movement must be less restricted. And vice versa.

To be honest, I can't put my finger on what actually changed. But I do remember when the CRTs were rocking the game, and I have a feeling that the introduction of the detonator changed very much. Its fine on a squishy ilttle reaper as a bailout weapon, but on EOC/Raiders or Heat/Scouts. Not so much.
And maybe thats the problem. No items are strictly class bound. Just imagine if they buff the Vulcan to make it really good with the Bruiser in mind.
Then the Berserker player unlocks it as a prestige gun. Nigthmare ensues...

Balancing weapons across different classes with significantly different properties in health and mobility. I have yet to see a game pull this off. One weapon or some items yes. But not every weapon and every item. But thats a different discussion.

Lets hope the game gets back on track with the upcoming patches and moves away from dodge and burst path its currently on. Kudos to the OP for bringing this up.

[RedVan]

curlupanddie, on March 28 2013 - 10:36 PM, said:

I find this topic 8 pages later, dividing folks into two (very familiar) parties.

Those that want a strategic, team based game, with all mechs evenly matched 1v1 for equally skilled pilots, allowing for "the beautiful dance".

And those that want burst damage, run and gun twitch play where they can get high kill streaks and be one man armies.

Currently Hawken offers both, but in practice and in the numbers, burst is king right now.

See, here you're making it sound like twitch games don't require just as much tactics and teamwork as your so called "strategic" games. That's simply not true. Tactics will be different, but just as much. And even the different tactics will simply just be a variation of the same thing.

Beemann, on March 28 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

TBH Quake actually allows much longer fights on a 1 to 1 scale than Hawken does, mostly due to the ability to avoid shots through a robust movement system. Hawken's movement is rather predictable and fairly slow

Yeah, hawken really does need more movement. At least back to the beta speed to start, or whenever it was, I can't remember which stage it was.

Edited by RedVan, March 29 2013 - 03:29 AM.

[NBShoot_me]

curlupanddie, on March 28 2013 - 10:29 PM, said:

NBShoot_me, on March 28 2013 - 09:16 PM, said:

Remove infinite ammo

Remove the full repair anywhere function

Do that and people can't troll you from across the map sitting in their favorite camping spot never having to move far from it.  You also force people to either RTB or seek the aid of another player rather than hold a position/constantly pushing until they're either killed or acknowledge that they've reached their hide-and-repair/heat limits and fall back on their own.

Weapons ONLY being heat limited and the ability to completely repair your mech to 100% on your own ANYWHERE does more to hurt gameplay than any gimmicky benefits a sales guy will tell you they bring.  But, no one agrees with me on this one... venting because I can I suppose.

NOTE: This is my opinion.

Are you really having an issue with campers in this game_ really_

The healing and heat functions aren't going anywhere. They are two major functions of gameplay unique to Hawken.  (INB4 blah blah has heat too, you know what I'm trying to say)

Just play more, and your opinion on these things will change.

It's the shallow gameplay and welded on training wheels that I have an issue with.  And I've played this game quite a bit, it's not an issue of being new here.  In Hawken, every weapon FUNCTIONS like an energy weapon, change ONLY the weapon model and sound file to something like lasers and plasma weapons, nothing else and it'd make more sense.


Weapons overheating is fine, that’s a good thing.  Projectile weapons overheating being the ONLY limiter, eeehhh.. not so much a good thing.


The self healing to 100% repaired, again, training wheels.  Maybe easy is good though..

[WarPig]

everyone has an idea of what they hope hawken will morph into and become in the end , and I don't think everyone will be happy regardless we will lose some and keep some pilots.

I feel having the ability to handle 1v1 / 2v1 is great in an FPS without being 1 shot kills, it provides engaging action and makes for great spectating.
I also feel that being able to burst doesn't mean that strategy isn't  involved....

Example - having a game mode such as CTF provides players with a style play that is forces teamwork/ strats and unique setups to prevent other teams from scoring. This doesn't change the dmg output of mechs but rather forces you to use what you are given to plan out how you will go about it.

I think with all the recent news with New mechs coming / new game modes / new maps / etc.. the crossroad that people are speaking of and where this dev team is at right now has already been decided and crossed... just a matter of time for them to catch us up to their plans for us

this past week with everything in the news about hawken has been exciting and eventful along with intense discussion. I am glad to see more things come and change,

[Goyo]

Someone mentioned that the game has changed and I concur.

Unfortunately, good changes are lost in my complaints.

Someone a few days ago started a thread called mallet versus sledgehammer. And I am in favor of that kind of approach to balance tweaking.
[adh] or [hwk] please make more minor changes but make  balance changes more often.  I'll be honest that in that this day and age your patches are painfully slow,

.

[ReachH]

Beemann, on March 28 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

TBH Quake actually allows much longer fights on a 1 to 1 scale than Hawken does, mostly due to the ability to avoid shots through a robust movement system. Hawken's movement is rather predictable and fairly slow

Yup, in conjunction with all of their weapons being dangerous, rather than just some.

[Goyo]

WarPig, on March 29 2013 - 03:41 AM, said:

everyone has an idea of what they hope hawken will morph into and become in the end , and I don't think everyone will be happy regardless we will lose some and keep some pilots.

I feel having the ability to handle 1v1 / 2v1 is great in an FPS without being 1 shot kills, it provides engaging action and makes for great spectating.
I also feel that being able to burst doesn't mean that strategy isn't  involved....

Example - having a game mode such as CTF provides players with a style play that is forces teamwork/ strats and unique setups to prevent other teams from scoring. This doesn't change the dmg output of mechs but rather forces you to use what you are given to plan out how you will go about it.

I think with all the recent news with New mechs coming / new game modes / new maps / etc.. the crossroad that people are speaking of and where this dev team is at right now has already been decided and crossed... just a matter of time for them to catch us up to their plans for us

this past week with everything in the news about hawken has been exciting and eventful along with intense discussion. I am glad to see more things come and change,

Thank you and good points... I wish I had not named the thread what it is currently.

The title is misleading to what the thread has become.

What I love about Hawken is what Hawken used to be.

I cringe at the mention of Esport because Hawken is so far away.

I miss the days of a well executed circle strafe around a missile silo

This version of Hawken does not support the chiken dance.

[Bowmangr]

FussyBadger, on March 29 2013 - 02:59 AM, said:

A few points to Bowmanr - First, Hawken has no business trying to provide the same gameplay experience as Mechwarrior Online. I don't want these two to become the CoD and BF3 of mech land. That's not a win for gamers and its certainly a radical departure from Hawken's intent.

Who said anything about BF3_
It just feels right that a huge armored mech should be fighting in a cumbersome way and not like it is onsteroids.
I understand Hawken's intent and I appreciate it. That is actually the reason why I like it over MW:O anyway.

Quote

Mechs can be relatively fast. Read the Hawken GC - there's reason for the limited bursts of speed. I can see an argument for less fuel, but not gimping the speed altogether.  Anyways, it sure seems like you fire up Hawken hoping that it will play like MWO. Doesn't it make more sense to fire up MWO instead_

I'll be blunt. The devs of MW:O try to rip you off with some marketing tricks in their so called 'Free' to play game. This is unacceptable.

Adhesive has shown that they are not trying to FORCE people to pay money to have fun. They actually want to present you with a cool game and make you pay real money because you actually WANT to pay real money.

So, if we are talking about gameplay, then yes, I much prefer the more strategic approach of MW:O than the dexterity based approach of today's Hawken. This is not a fair comparison though because Siege mode is not completed yet.

But a player has to put up with other factors as well. Server availability, free to play vs pay 2 win, feeling, controls, even graphics and sound. In all these categories, Hawken is better. It's gritty, the sounds are amazing {although I do have to admit that some Alpha sounds were better than their Beta replacements}

Hawken is the game that I want to play, but I want it to play tactically, not twitchy.

Quote

Second, the TTK comparison to CoD is an exaggeration. CoD has a large number of ways for a lone player to kill another player in a fraction of a second. I haven't experienced that same TTK in Hawken from a solo mech in my A Class on a remotely regular basis, if at all. It's not the same at all. I rarely feel like I got hit by a freight train and had no chance to react or survive. It's not at CoD levels and I will be surprised if it gets any closer than it already is.

Again, I said that the game is on crossroads, I didn't say that it is exactly like CoD. It tilted in CoD direction though and this is bad. I hope that the devs are aware of this and even if they weren't this thread is a neat idea by the OP in order to create a discussion before its too late. Heck, the thread is already 9 pages long. This shows that there IS something to talk about right_ It's not the OP's imagination.

Hawken HAS to decide what kind of game it wants to be. BETA is its last chance to decide.

Quote

Finally, if becoming a faster paced game is the worst thing that could happen to Hawken, I urge you to exercise more creativity and bring some fun into your imagination. Imagine if Hawken became mechs versus endangered pandas. Or "Hawken: the game of mechanized dish washing." Or a kaleidoscopic Japanese karaoke game featuring dancing mechs. How about if dying actually gave you an electric shock in the junk with every death_ Those are way worse fates than a faster pace!

I'll take this as an attempt at humor {albeit poor if I may say so}. Yes, the game can be whatever the devs want it to be. People will react negatively whatever they do. If they speed it up they will muster the 'twitcher' crowd, if they slow it down they will drive it away. Right now it seems that they are trying to do both. This is a recipe for disaster. It cannot be done and the sooner they decide which way they want to go the better.

If they decide that they want a generic shooter with a mech twist then that's fine, I'll just pack my things and go find another game, strategy genre as usual. If they are trying to make something unique, which is exactly the reason why I'm here, a strategy gamer, posting in this forum, playing an action game and actually enjoying it for a change, then I'm in all the way.

Right now, I'm just waiting to see a new patch with some changes, to get a glimpse of what they are trying to do. I give them the benefit of the doubt because I totally understand that they are experimenting right now while the game is still in BETA.

My advice to Adhesive would be to sit down and decide NOW what is the game's direction rather than later and build up from that. Trying to appeal to both crowds will just drive them away. It's bad for everyone.

Just my 2 cents.

[RedVan]

Bowmangr, on March 29 2013 - 05:42 AM, said:

So, if we are talking about gameplay, then yes, I much prefer the more strategic approach of MW:O than the dexterity based approach of today's Hawken. This is not a fair comparison though because Siege mode is not completed yet.

But a player has to put up with other factors as well. Server availability, free to play vs pay 2 win, feeling, controls, even graphics and sound. In all these categories, Hawken is better. It's gritty, the sounds are amazing {although I do have to admit that some Alpha sounds were better than their Beta replacements}

Hawken is the game that I want to play, but I want it to play tactically, not twitchy.

curlupanddie, on March 28 2013 - 10:36 PM, said:

I find this topic 8 pages later, dividing folks into two (very familiar) parties.

Those that want a strategic, team based game, with all mechs evenly matched 1v1 for equally skilled pilots, allowing for "the beautiful dance".

And those that want burst damage, run and gun twitch play where they can get high kill streaks and be one man armies.

Currently Hawken offers both, but in practice and in the numbers, burst is king right now.

See, here you're making it sound like twitch games don't require just as much tactics and teamwork as your so called "strategic" games. That's simply not true. Tactics will be different, but just as much. And even the different tactics will simply just be a variation of the same thing.

Beemann, on March 28 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

TBH Quake actually allows much longer fights on a 1 to 1 scale than Hawken does, mostly due to the ability to avoid shots through a robust movement system. Hawken's movement is rather predictable and fairly slow

Yeah, hawken really does need more movement. At least back to the beta speed to start, or whenever it was, I can't remember which stage it was.

[Bowmangr]

RedVan, on March 29 2013 - 06:23 AM, said:

See, here you're making it sound like twitch games don't require just as much tactics and teamwork as your so called "strategic" games. That's simply not true. Tactics will be different, but just as much. And even the different tactics will simply just be a variation of the same thing.

I respectfully disagree.
Twitch games have subtypes and those subtypes have different variations on how much tactics affects the gameplay.

For example, if I play Deathmatch where I don't have support, I MUST know how to fight in close quarters battles because it will happen and noone will be there to save me. Moreover, some mechs with specific support roles are useless 70% of the time. Tactics have to do with your positioning and choice of engaging a target that is not shooting at you. All the rest is twitch combat which plays a HUGE role.

If I play Siege or Missile Assault, the tactics required change drastically. Even the overall strategy changes. You no longer move around shouting everything that moves, you have to form a plan. Support mechs have a distinct role on the battlefield and those mech play a very different game than other CQ combat mechs.
Tactics here are existant in a more substantial way. Twitch skills do count as always {this is an action game after all} but if your team, their mechs and their role is used as they should, then they effectively act as a force multiplier, making even an otherwise disadvantaged match-up, winnable.
THIS is tactics and this is strategy. Tactics is something that may give you an advantage in situation which in theory is stacked against you.
For example a Scout vs a Sharpshooter in close quarters is heavily stacked against SS {don't tell me that it is winable or that you consistently have won Scouts with your SS, you don't know how many times the Scout has killed you, brain tends to forget that, you just remember more your wins than your losses}.
In a deathmatch game, there are less tactics, twitch skills are king.

Imagine the same situation in a Team game, where the SS tells via his mic, to his teammates that a Scout is chasing him and while he tries to get away someone else, who has a ROLE of protecting his team's SS, steps up and kills the Scout. Now THAT is tactics. The twitch skill are still required because if you can't hit anything you won't go nowhere but you won't find yourself getting frustrated while trying to hit a Scout which is engaged with another mech and hasn't seen you yet. It will be way easier than fighting a Scout 1 vs 1.

Tactics are needed more or less in every game, noone said that twitch games have no tactics whatsoever. They DO have a lower need for tactics though than a full fledged strategy game or even a more tactical action gameplay. Hawken began as a more tactical game and now seems more twitchy than ever. Less tactics, more twitchy feel. It still has tactics but way less than before.

Quote

Yeah, hawken really does need more movement. At least back to the beta speed to start, or whenever it was, I can't remember which stage it was.

See, this is what I'm talking about. Hawken needs to decide what kind of game it is to at least make one of the two crowds happy. You want more speed, I want LESS speed, more armor and more distinct mech roles on the battlefield. Right now noone is happy. THIS is the problem.

Edited by Bowmangr, March 29 2013 - 08:17 AM.

[RedVan]

@bowman:

All those tactics you described apply to the gameplay whether its considered "twitch" or "strategic". In twitch gameplay, you just need to make those decisions much faster.

Bowmangr, on March 29 2013 - 08:13 AM, said:

Tactics are needed more or less in every game, noone said that twitch games have no tactics whatsoever. They DO have a lower need for tactics though than a full fledged strategy game or even a more tactical action gameplay. Hawken began as a more tactical game and now seems more twitchy than ever. Less tactics, more twitchy feel. It still has tactics but way less than before.

When you have good players playing crappy players, yes, good players can use "twitch" and minimal tactics, and destroy the bad player.

However, when you have all high skilled players, now you better be using all the tactics that any "strategic" game could possibly require, because if you rely only on your pro twitch skills, the team using twitch and tactics ("strategy") will win.

You know how you wouldn't wander into an open field in MWO, relying on your twitch skillz to get you out of a bind_  Even in the most twitchy games like UT and quake you still don't wander out to an open area against skilled players. It's just stupid, no matter how pro your twitch skills are. If the enemy is close to as good as you with twitch, but they are also using tactics (teamwork, cover, deciding what class to counter with, etc) they will win.

This is what makes "twitch" games far more interesting, at high levels of play, both skill sets are required. In slow games considered "strategic", you may as well throw twitch out the widow, because its not necessary. Thus, you're only using one skill set.

For example:  I played MWLL extensively for a period of time, all I needed to do was use good tactics and I quickly became one of the top tier players (and easily the best Sulla pilot). I didn't need to worry about whether I had good twitch skills or not. Now in hawken, I need to focus on using both skills.

Edited by RedVan, March 29 2013 - 08:33 AM.