167 replies to this topic

[Muffintrumpet]

I think it will hand too much back to the sniper classes but will wait and see

[KejiGoto]

I don't think there is an exact figure I can give to my answer as it varies depending upon the situation, what mechs are involved, and so forth. For example I think if you get caught with your pants down and are in an A-Class TTK should be 1 second but if you're in a straight up fight, dodging well, and positioning yourself over your opponent TTK should be around 5 seconds.

However I am in favor of the new changes coming to Hawken, big time. Mostly in the form of what is happening in putting an emphasis on skill over anything else but I would be lying if I said I didn't snicker at the thought of A-Classes being glass cannons. That has been my thought on the class from day one and this is how I've always viewed fast and agile versus slow and armored. I really like the idea that it is going to take skill now to play what is arguably one of the best classes in the game.

The big thing I think this lends itself too and something I'm very in favor of is punishing reckless pilots. I'm all for playing fast and loose but far too often I see pilots make choices that should, in all honesty, result in their death, and yet somehow they manage to walk away with because the current mechanics favor this kind of gameplay. Heck if I'm in a Scout, I see someone weak falling back into the enemy lines, and I can somehow blow past the enemy team (while taking fire), stop to kill this person, then activate my skill and take off without getting killed (again taking fire this entire time) only to get away from the enemy team with around 100 health just shouldn't be happening in my opinion. This sounds more like something a Raider should only be capable of.

This is why I'm in favor of lower TTK now. Doing something like that is going to get you killed and I think many of us are going to start feeling the heavy mistakes we make which right now the current game is very forgiving about.

[X3P0]

There are just a few bits of information I would like to keep in mind when thinking this through. Many titles that have been extremely successful in the fps genre use low ttk models and this has been touched on. Let us also remember some factors that differentiate the combat in Hawken from other titles such as the emphasis on dodging attacks which is a movement with far more strategic importance than the jumping/crouching/going prone of other titles. The items also have some interesting effects on the time to kill. I think it is a brilliant idea to try and mimic to some degree the gameplay of other titles while still offering breathing room and more advanced thought out play at higher skill tiers. Players who enjoy these titles may find a good game in Hawken and help grow the user base substantially - at least this is a possibility. It would appear however, on some level to be incomparable to these other games because of the factors and variables which change the time to kill. I find Hawken to be relatively unique and feel it will continue to be this way.

My primary concern, rather what interests me most is the effect the patch will have on how interesting the game is to watch. You see first person shooters typically are not all that interesting to watch from my viewpoint - although Hawken shows a lot of promise in how the gameplay might be developed as to whether this might change. It would have a very large impact on gaming if it were the oddball in the group that offered viewership and enjoyment. Although it interests me personally, it does not mean it necessarily has importance or relevance although this could also facilitate the growth of the population or value of the game from a money making standpoint. If you have viewers you have advertisement and partnership possibilities and money can help the development of a game. The same goes for players.

I am excited to see how this turns out, how the community will react to this patch in their testing and the crucial ones that follow between now and release.

[DerMax]

<nvm>

Edited by DerMax, January 30 2014 - 01:59 PM.

[flimsy]

KejiGoto, on January 30 2014 - 01:31 PM, said:

skill

You use that word like it's a clearly defined term with a coherent, generally agreed upon meaning, but it isn't at all. The debate over what constitutes skill lies at core of the disagreements over almost every change that goes live. I think it was Leon who spoke very derisively about people who consider waiting for a bar to recharge to be an element of skill, and I think that reveals the very narrow way that many of the people who play tested the patch define the concept. The skill is not in waiting for the bar to recharge, but rather in not letting it hit zero when doing so will result in your death. It's exactly the sort of thing that works to prevent a Scout from blowing past a team's defenses, killing a weakened player, and escaping. Lowering the health on the Scout misses the point entirely, because it's speed that lets a player escape, not health or damage or any of the other factors that the patch addresses.

If anything, making the mechs faster and drastically lowering the TTK will increase the reckless urge to dash in and get a kill before you die. Gameplay is going to become increasingly geared towards twitch reactions and kill streak dominance, because better players will be able to more easily rely on their reflexes to escape damage, and the element of thoughtful positioning and rationing of scarce resources will almost entirely vanish. I stopped playing FPS's entirely because while I was perfectly able to learn the reflex responses necessary to perform well at those games, they're fundamentally boring for all but a small minority of people who are obsessed with the limits of human faction time.

I've been playing FPS games for over 20 years, and Hawken is the first game in a generation that breaks the mold. Yet here we are trying to force the game back in.

Edited by flimsy, January 30 2014 - 02:07 PM.

[X3P0]

flimsy, on January 30 2014 - 02:02 PM, said:

Things flimsy said

I have some concerns with your general thought process and some of the statements you have made.

Quote

better players will be able to more easily rely on their reflexes to escape damage

I am not really certain how this is a factor. I feel as if this is always the case in any scenario we run with any variables we use. If anything the better player as it were would have to be more careful or equally careful given the inexperienced or lesser player, whatever they might be has greater odds in killing them in the off chance they can land a shot. I think it still comes down to landing shots between dodges and whether you can do that. I mean I can say its a travesty if the better player has 300 more armor, because they would get a lot more out of it than someone who is not very good.

As far as thoughtful positioning I also thought this would be more relevant than ever because less time is required to kill someone, and thus they only need be out of position or out in the open for a very short duration.

I do not know if the fps genre is boring for all but a minority. I mean there are over a hundred million gamers playing those games you described. Instead, they are boring for you, and possibly for me to some extent and probably to some amount of players in this specific community.

I would also question the topic of skill in relation to whether someone is watching a bar or not. How fun is watching a bar or meter, what does that add to a game - just generally I am not aware if this would be a key element in why people enjoy Hawken or any game. I do not see relevance as it does not seem like it is hard to do or that it could add much depth to gameplay.

I could possibly feel like I am achieving something if a bar was present and my timing would correlate between how far I dodged or shot a catapult like in the angrybirds type games, not that I would advocate implementing that, just I cannot really think of anything it could add to a game.

I was just curious on these bits.

Edited by X3P0, January 30 2014 - 03:51 PM.

[FenixStryk]

I am mostly fond of Hawken's TTK, although I don't think the current TTK on optimized A Class setups was where it should be. It doesn't surprise me at all that Ascension Flak Scout with Repair Orb MK3, Shield MK1, Fuel Converter, Extractor and Repair Kit became one of the most popular pub-stomping setups. Based upon the information already released (limited items, 305 HP Scout, Flak nerfed, sustained buffed) it seems plausible that Scout will be in a better place post-patch.

Transcension at its most basic level will do two things across the board: HP values have been lowered by one class level, and mobility levels have been raised by one class level. While I'm sure TTK will be lower, I am not entirely convinced that it has been lowered so significantly that deaths will be instantaneous (for B/C pilots; RIP Scout).

I will wait for the build to be in my hands before making a more firm judgment, but based upon the current information I see Transcension as offering more improvements than regressions.

P.S. I liked GunZ, I am looking forward to GunZ 2, and turning Hawken into HawkenZ: The Duel is a sick, twisted fantasy that I could potentially live with.

[ShadowWarg]

Riddle me this. If you increase the mobility of the game so that mechs move faster and more fluidly, but then you increase the health of the mechs, are you effectively increasing the over all pace of the game, decreasing it, or does it remains the same_

Anyway I also like the Current TTK that Hawken has. It one of the reasons I play this over games like CoD and Battlefield. I'll just have to wait and see I guess. BUT I will say I'm going to be so happy to blow up scouts now.

[Rabid_Peanut_Butter]

flimsy, on January 30 2014 - 02:02 PM, said:

I've been playing FPS games for over 20 years, and Hawken is the first game in a generation that breaks the mold. Yet here we are trying to force the game back in.

ShadowWarg, on January 30 2014 - 04:36 PM, said:

Anyway I also like the Current TTK that Hawken has. It one of the reasons I play this over games like CoD and Battlefield. I'll just have to wait and see I guess. BUT I will say I'm going to be so happy to blow up scouts now.

This is my general feeling.  I am not jumping to the conclusion that the shorter TTK will not be fun.  It very well may be and I'll give it a shot.

My concern is that it starts to feel more like any other FPS, to the point where I'd just play those instead.

[h0B0]

This to me seems like it came out of left field. Rarely if ever have i seen request in the forums to decrease TTk. Actually i've seen more than a few threads about people complaining they die too fast and my friends who tried it complained of the short TTK.

A lot of people have been saying that the game is going to be more skill intensive or competitive but fail to grasp the complexity of those statements. Skill isn't aiming exclusively, many other things are required skills to play an fps. Other games can afford to have low TTK as they put considerably more emphasis on aiming than hawken does. Hawken has no headshots, has controllable splash damage doesn't have consistent spread etc...

The thing that got a lot of the alpha players interested in the game was the shift away from the traditional short TTK FPS. Hawken doesn't reward amazing marksmanship as much as other games. What hawken does reward is "dog fighting" skills, its all about managing your 3 principal resources in conjuction with your mobility and situational awareness.


This post might be incomplete, i don;t care enjoy.

Edit: Thanks to X3P0 i got round to completing this post: here it is. Other games can afford to put this much emphasis on aiming skill because the game is based around it. Counter-strike can afford to be headshot centric because it has smaller hitboxes and a deep spread mechanic that rewards players that learn the ins and outs of said mechanic. Games like tribes and Quake rewards good aim because of the speed of the deep mobility mechanics.

hawken Is also slower than quake and tribes. Its movement mechanics are a simple press of a button away. The hitboxes are huge and your aiming skill is artificially restricted by the turn cap. Many current mechanics allow you to bypass aiming almost entirely.

I believe hawken would gain a lot by putting emphasis on long fights where resource management and movement are the primary decisive factors in an engagement. Unless they intend to rework the majority of their current mechanics.

Edited by h0B0, January 30 2014 - 08:30 PM.

[h0B0]

ShadowWarg, on January 30 2014 - 04:36 PM, said:

Riddle me this. If you increase the mobility of the game so that mechs move faster and more fluidly, but then you increase the health of the mechs, are you effectively increasing the over all pace of the game, decreasing it, or does it remains the same_

Good question. Unlike TTK game pace is a very complex thing. It takes so many variables into consideration from time to respawn to time to reach a fight to amount of time spent fighting vs repairing. Honestly if we increase health and mobility one could easily argue that the pace is faster since the action is more feverish and happens with less interruptions. Decreasing the TTK and increasing the mobility would have the adverse effect. Whilst it will lead to less downtime when attempting to reach an engagement said engagement is shorter, and the respawn timer is effectively taking up a larger percentage of game time.

Hope you appreciated my attempt at sharing my understanding of pace. I look forward to reading all yalls

[X3P0]

h0B0, on January 30 2014 - 06:45 PM, said:

This to me seems like it came out of left field. Rarely if ever have i seen request in the forums to decrease TTk. Actually i've seen more than a few threads about people complaining they die too fast and my friends who tried it complained of the short TTK.

A lot of people have been saying that the game is going to be more skill intensive or competitive but fail to grasp the complexity of those statements. Skill isn't aiming exclusively, many other things are required skills to play an fps. Other games can afford to have low TTK as they put considerably more emphasis on aiming than hawken does. Hawken has no headshots, has controllable splash damage doesn't have consistent spread etc...

The thing that got a lot of the alpha players interested in the game was the shift away from the traditional short TTK FPS. Hawken doesn't reward amazing marksmanship as much as other games. What hawken does reward is "dog fighting" skills, its all about managing your 3 principal resources in conjuction with your mobility and situational awareness.


This post might be incomplete, i don;t care enjoy.

Not caring and posting randomly explains the post count, that is impressive.

I have some questions, I can agree in part with some general statements which ring true, but I am uncertain of what conclusions you are drawing.

For instance when you state others may be incorrect in suggesting the game could be more skill intensive, could you offer some sort of logic or reasoning as to why this would be_ You state that they were missing a broader scope of what makes up some skill factor, but you do not explain this idea further or validate the idea. I feel as if you may have inferred this and that may have been a mistake because perhaps other posters did not feel they needed to mention several variables to present an idea and instead left that for granted.

What I see in the post are a couple ideas or things that could be seen as true, and than statements with little support and I feel as if this is a bit of a bait tactic.

For instance if I say,
The government is fuzzy bunny you over in favor of corporations.
The Government is spying on you.
(Random Third Statement)

I would get my idea across (the variable third statement) and people would be more prone to accepting said idea because the first 2 statements might be feelings or ideas generally accepted in some form to the public, but in the end the third statement was never validated.

So could you please explain this in further detail, what the relevance of the second paragraph is_
Specifically:

Quote

A lot of people have been saying that the game is going to be more skill intensive or competitive but fail to grasp the complexity of those statements. Skill isn't aiming exclusively, many other things are required skills to play an fps. Other games can afford to have low TTK as they put considerably more emphasis on aiming than hawken does. Hawken has no headshots, has controllable splash damage doesn't have consistent spread

Are you simply afraid they might draw the wrong conclusions on the inferred idea that they were not taking more variables than stated into account_ Or are you trying to say those posters were incorrect, and if so, why_ This is what I am having trouble with.

Was it because of the noted complexity you thought they might be wrong_ I don't feel this goes beyond saying something is complex. Are you leaving this as its complex and you cannot decide for yourself and do not know if you can establish whether others are correct in their thinking because of this overbearing idea of complexity_

Edited by X3P0, January 30 2014 - 07:28 PM.

[comic_sans]

To me, lower (but still reasonably above COD nonsense) TTK means easier to break up deathballs.  I'm for it.

[Sylhiri]

comic_sans, on January 30 2014 - 07:21 PM, said:

To me, lower (but still reasonably above COD nonsense) TTK means easier to break up deathballs.  I'm for it.

Maybe. I have a feeling that people will want to go into deathballs more as there is safety in numbers and easier to kill mechs quicker as a group, even more so with lower health.

Edited by Sylhiri, January 30 2014 - 07:43 PM.

[h0B0]

X3P0, on January 30 2014 - 07:19 PM, said:

h0B0, on January 30 2014 - 06:45 PM, said:

This to me seems like it came out of left field. Rarely if ever have i seen request in the forums to decrease TTk. Actually i've seen more than a few threads about people complaining they die too fast and my friends who tried it complained of the short TTK.

A lot of people have been saying that the game is going to be more skill intensive or competitive but fail to grasp the complexity of those statements. Skill isn't aiming exclusively, many other things are required skills to play an fps. Other games can afford to have low TTK as they put considerably more emphasis on aiming than hawken does. Hawken has no headshots, has controllable splash damage doesn't have consistent spread etc...

The thing that got a lot of the alpha players interested in the game was the shift away from the traditional short TTK FPS. Hawken doesn't reward amazing marksmanship as much as other games. What hawken does reward is "dog fighting" skills, its all about managing your 3 principal resources in conjuction with your mobility and situational awareness.


This post might be incomplete, i don;t care enjoy.

Not caring and posting randomly explains the post count, that is impressive.

I used to care a lot, maybe a bit too much. But the comment about not caring is only linked to that specific statement, i got an hour long phone call mid posts and couldn't remeber where i was going with it, and just posted it anyway.

I have some questions, I can agree in part with some general statements which ring true, but I am uncertain of what conclusions you are drawing.

For instance when you state others may be incorrect in suggesting the game could be more skill intensive, could you offer some sort of logic or reasoning as to why this would be_ You state that they were missing a broader scope of what makes up some skill factor, but you do not explain this idea further or validate the idea. I feel as if you may have inferred this and that may have been a mistake because perhaps other posters did not feel they needed to mention several variables to present an idea and instead left that for granted.

Some people have argued in my previous cockpit discussion thread that the increase in mobility will increase the skill requirement of the game. Although this is partially correct as it will increase the skill required to track a target it also neuters an entire subskill entirely ( fuel management ). This week a host stated that a FPS primary focus should be on its aiming skill. Hawkens design is built around very little aiming skill requirement. From sticky beams, to tracking missiles, to detonatable projectiles, to massive AoE splash, to giant hitboxes without skillshots. To try and push hawken away from the skills that make it unique and provide the little depth that it has to favor a skill that is by far the easiest to achieve in this game that has mechanics to bypass it entirely is in my opinion a bad design decision.

What I see in the post are a couple ideas or things that could be seen as true, and than statements with little support and I feel as if this is a bit of a bait tactic.

For instance if I say,
The government is fuzzy bunny you over in favor of corporations.
The Government is spying on you.
(Random Third Statement)

I would get my idea across (the variable third statement) and people would be more prone to accepting said idea because the first 2 statements might be feelings or ideas generally accepted in some form to the public, but in the end the third statement was never validated.

So could you please explain this in further detail, what the relevance of the second paragraph is_
Specifically:

Quote

A lot of people have been saying that the game is going to be more skill intensive or competitive but fail to grasp the complexity of those statements. Skill isn't aiming exclusively, many other things are required skills to play an fps. Other games can afford to have low TTK as they put considerably more emphasis on aiming than hawken does. Hawken has no headshots, has controllable splash damage doesn't have consistent spread

Are you simply afraid they might draw the wrong conclusions on the inferred idea that they were not taking more variables than stated into account_ Or are you trying to say those posters were incorrect, and if so, why_ This is what I am having trouble with.

I think i got it in my previous paragraph. I'm not attempting to antagonise anyone by saying their statements are wrong, far from it. What i was attempting to say is that hawken has something unique. Hawken is a game based around mobility and using your environment. Its a game where the aiming skills required are minimal when compared to other shooters. To sacrifice the mechanics that make this game unique to favour mechanics that would make it comparable to the masses is ... I believe hawken would gain more by focusing on its strenght than trying to appeal to the masses in a bland and uninspired way.

Was it because of the noted complexity you thought they might be wrong_ I don't feel this goes beyond saying something is complex. Are you leaving this as its complex and you cannot decide for yourself and do not know if you can establish whether others are correct in their thinking because of this overbearing idea of complexity_
^ i'm confused by this question. Would like to answering but can't. Hopefully my first paragraph will adress this issue but would gladly continue this discussion further if required.

Edit: i think i got this.

Other games can afford to put this much emphasis on aiming skill because the game is based around it. Counter-strike can afford to be headshot centric because it has smaller hitboxes and a deep spread mechanic that rewards players that learn the ins and outs of said mechanic. Games like tribes and Quake rewards good aim because of the speed of the deep mobility mechanics.

hawken Is also slower than quake and tribes. Its movement mechanics are a simple press of a button away. The hitboxes are huge and your aiming skill is artificially restricted by the turn cap. Many current mechanics allow you to bypass aiming almost entirely.

I believe hawken would gain a lot by putting emphasis on long fights where resource management and movement are the primary decisive factors in an engagement. Unless they intend to rework the majority of their current mechanics.

Edited by h0B0, January 30 2014 - 08:30 PM.

[ArachII]

I am a bit ambiguous about TTK. For me, there are many parameters to consider.

What I enjoy in Hawken is the secondary and dodge combo. There is high burst damage but you can avoid it by dodging. In and ideal fight I find that I must always dodge the opponent's secondary strikes, so the only thing killing me is the primary weapon. So secondaries are there to punish bad awareness or dodging use and act as a surprise element. That is how I envision the primary/secondary weapon use.

However, if the TTK is so low that the secondary doesn't come in play more than twice per engagements, then I would find an interesting part of Hawken missing. Also, I hope that turning a corner will not result in a sudden death if there is only two mechs on the other side. While it would encourage more map awareness, I do not want to see a whole team being annihilated because they had the misforturne to be the first to cross the corner. Or worse, seeing campers being untouchable because no one can approach them (think of some area in Bazaar, as an example). This would be an extreme, I am not saying this would be the case if TTK is lowered.

On the other side, if TTK is so high that secondary weapon fire can be ignored, then I'd find the game lacking an interesting aspect. Also I would not like to see everyone being able to flee because their life is dropping so slowly they have time to realize when it is time to get out. I still think jumping on three other mechs should result in a quick death.

I think it is more of a balance between secondaries and primaries while making sure that instakill are nonexistent. Make it so that we can see people dodging TOWs or GLs multiple times in a fight, crossing corners do not result in a certain death and going LEEEEEEROY JEEEEEERKINS! is hardly punished. The rest, I can't really speak about.

[X3P0]

h0B0, on January 30 2014 - 08:08 PM, said:

hobos response

I have some ideas on these statements.

For Fuel Management - Was this a fun mechanic of the game, did watching this bar add entertainment value_ Was it hard to make note of this bar_ It would appear much of the skill involved in dodging is still present in the next patch - I am not so certain we are losing much of anything that could be deemed skill related. What I am trying to say, perhaps the developers asked themselves those questions when they changed that aspect of the game. It makes sense to me.

Quote

Hawken is a game based around mobility and using your environment

How do you feel this has changed and why_

Quote

To sacrifice the mechanics that make this game unique

Which mechanics are you referring to here specifically_ For instance I didn't think managing the fuel bar was what made the game unique and I am not sure any of us settled on Hawken as a game because of the inclusion of the fuel bar. What I feel makes it unique is the emphasis on the movement you mentioned previously - and movement has been increased in the patch. Another factor is the time to kill and this factor is ever so present and still a unique factor which sets the game apart. The time to kill with the mobility and items is substantially greater than other first person shooters. So to me I do not really understand what is being said or the idea I am supposed to take away. Do you have any comments in relation to these statements_


/////////////////////////////

In relation to Arachs comments in the thread

Quote

what arachll said

With the very high ttk we have now at the time of my writing those predator mine traps could still instagib mechs, which I think is fine I am just illustrating sudden death occurs as is.

Also I think a lot of concerns are of less concern at second glance if were are to plug those concerns into a match which is more balanced than not in skill.

For instance high tier dodge capabilities will save me walking around a corner, higher tier enemy aim abilities might destroy me when walking around a corner, but if I am playing with equally skilled players, wont this play out more favorably than if there are distinct differences in skill between me and the 6 members of the enemy team_ For instance I would not think personally about the worst possible scenarios, but those scenarios which are more likely to occur for you.

Rather I am trying to convey the idea to remember, as matchmaker is developed and the population grows, we will see less gaps in skill and I want people to keep that in consideration when mulling over game changes. I am not devaluing the statements rather reinforcing the idea we all remember that teams will become more balanced as the game is developed. Again I think you have some reasonable general ideas, I am trying to use your text as an example to ensure we all remember the mind frame we need to think about these issues with.

Edited by X3P0, January 30 2014 - 08:50 PM.

[h0B0]

X3P0, on January 30 2014 - 08:33 PM, said:

h0B0, on January 30 2014 - 08:08 PM, said:

hobos response

I have some ideas on these statements.

For Fuel Management - Was this a fun mechanic of the game, did watching this bar add entertainment value_ Yes, it added a strategical thought process in the choices you made with the dodge and boosting. Was is hard to make note of this bar_  No. It would appear much of the skill involved in dodging is still present in the next patch - I am not so certain we are losing much of anything that could be deemed skill related. What I am trying to say, perhaps the developers asked themselves those questions when they changed that aspect of the game. It makes sense to me. Hopefully the devs did ask themselves the question. The skill required to manage fuel is very low, but its not inexistent. The difference between a great player and a good player is that they have similar aiming skill, but the great player can use his fuel management and make on the fly decision about either keeping his resources to dodge an extra TOW or to save it to run away from the backup that is coming to kick his ass for exemple. I've always been of the opinion that resource management could use more emphasis in hawken. In its current state its shallow, but its not inconsequential. A good idea that has been brought up multiple times is to combine heat and fuel. That would add considerable more thought process to engagements as you're constantly adjusting your play to maximize your usage of the resource depending on the situation.

Quote

Hawken is a game based around mobility and using your environment

How do you feel this has changed and why_

It will inevitably change. Its hard to say how much it will change since we don't have numbers or experience in the new game. But Considering Van' stated that alpha strikes are nearly enough to kill a mech we're going to see a shift in the game where cover usage is nearly required. No more long chases, juking and other shenanigans like we used to have in pre-ascension games.

Quote

To sacrifice the mechanics that make this game unique

Which mechanics are you referring to here specifically_ For instance I didn't think managing the fuel bar was what made the game unique and I am not sure any of us settled on Hawken as a game because of the inclusion of the fuel bar. Once again i'd like to stress that i don't think the current system is very polished or very deep. That being said, how many games have you played where your mobility was directly linked to a resource_ Personally, the closest i have come are games that have sprinting stamina and fuel for jetpacks(firefall). Both of which don't provide as many possibilities as hawken has. Both of which will be nearly identical to the next patch hawken. What I feel makes it unique is the emphasis on the movement you mentioned previously - and movement has been increased in the patch. Dodging will be increased with the next patch. Movement out of cover is getting nerfed via shorter TTK. What i'm advocating for is implementing a more in depth resource system. Rewarding a player for his knowledge of the game mechanics. Another factor is the time to kill and this factor is ever so present and still a unique factor which sets the game apart. The time to kill with the mobility and items is substantially greater than other first person shooters. Yes exactly, and this leads to_ I argue that the higher TTK hawken is known for is a great opportunity to build a game revolving around prolonged engagements a game in which the focus isn't on poor aiming mechanics, but on the mechanics that need to be taken into consideration in prolonged fights. So to me I do not really understand what is being said or the idea I am supposed to take away. Simply put, i think shortening the TTK and removing fuel from dodge are two design choices that go against the spirit of the hawken i initially fell in love with.

Do you have any comments in relation to these statements_

Edited by h0B0, January 30 2014 - 09:08 PM.

[WarPig]

I'm Glad they mentioned that splash damage / radius of items was also changed. Making it much harder and causing players to focus more on Direct hits and skillful timing/aiming

I can only imagine the HP that Vann said with all the splash we have now would be just like insane right _ ....


I think if an FPS offers to much Splash dmg or just the ability to spam an area and doesn't reward or give you the edge to be more accurate then it's promoting poor game play and lazy players. I have seen some great players in this game pick up bad habits and lose their skill over time due to the above said issues. This gives me hope that if the right things are adjusted across the board which is what is being done from what we are being told then we may have hope yet to see some great game play with what im hoping for an enjoyable spectating shooter that I can sit down and shout cast teams going at it watching clutch plays and good loudouts with diverse strats etc..

but hey all in time I guess.....

[h0B0]

WarPig, on January 30 2014 - 09:08 PM, said:

but hey all in time I guess.....

Hopefully it won't take them another 6 months.