71 replies to this topic

[Timber_Wolf]

Armored core is a fantastic game and I absolutely love it to death.  Air dodging in the game is a fantastic concept in it, it's tons of fun, and it's amazing.
But this isn't armored core.  As it stands, we're piloting heavy mechs that barely have the capacity to fly as it is.  I see no way of air dodge not giving A class a massive boost in maneuverability.  For the mech to dodge midair it would have to stop powering its vertical thrusters and point them sideways which would send you rocketing to the ground for a not-so-fun-time.  Jump-jetting as it stands is already useful for maneuvering the map and for catching enemies unaware sometimes.
It makes no sense for balance and it makes no sense with the mech's current thruster systems.

[RedVan]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 18 2012 - 08:31 AM, said:

RedVan, on November 18 2012 - 08:12 AM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on November 17 2012 - 12:33 PM, said:

RedVan, on November 17 2012 - 10:23 AM, said:

Well, nothing, needs to be anything.  They didn't need to make hawken.  It's not about necessity, its about fun.

edit: i take that back, the game does need something.  It needs to be fun.  If you don't think air dodge is fun, thats one thing, but dont say that air dodge isn't needed as an in-combat tactic.

Would you quit Hawken if it was announced that they would never, ever, ever even consider adding air dodge_

No.

Then by your own admittance the game doesn't need the mechanic, that Beemann/DM30 are justified in saying so and therefor you are just arguing silly semantics for no real reason.

Correct, the game does not need air dodge.  Currently, the game doesn't even need jets.  I've yet to find a reason where I cannot do what I'd like to do w/o jets.  Adding air dodge would simply give jets more use, and make the game more fun overall.  Necessary_  No.  Add a tad more challenge to hitting someone in the air_  Yes.  More challenge = fun_  Yes.

Timber_Wolf, on November 18 2012 - 07:37 PM, said:

Armored core is a fantastic game and I absolutely love it to death.  Air dodging in the game is a fantastic concept in it, it's tons of fun, and it's amazing.
But this isn't armored core.

Ok, people can stop comparing it to AC.  HAWKENs movement is currently nothing like AC, and even if air dodge is added, it still will be nothing like AC.

Here is what AC movement looks like, since apparently many people have forgotten:  

Does that look remotely like HAWKEN_  I mean, I know there are mechs, but, aside from that... it's nothing like HAWKEN.  You people see the phrase "mid air dodge" and immediately think it will magically transform HAWKEN into AC.  That's not how video game design works.  I'm sorry to burst your bubble.

Here is your thought process:
"Guy wants air dodge in HAWKEN
AC had air dodge
HAWKEN + air dodge = AC
I want HAWKEN to be HAWKEN
Thus, HAWKEN cannot have air dodge"

Talk about shutting your mind into the tiniest little box possible lol.

Air dodge would not allow mechs to fly.
Air dodge would be limited to once per "air time".
Air dodge would have the same distance limit as ground dodge.
Air dodge looks nothing like AC, UT, or any other game with dodge mechanics.

Please, STOP trying to compare HAWKEN air dodge to your preconceived notions of what air dodge is.

As for the rest of your argument:

Quote

As it stands, we're piloting heavy mechs that barely have the capacity to fly as it is.  I see no way of air dodge not giving A class a massive boost in maneuverability.  For the mech to dodge midair it would have to stop powering its vertical thrusters and point them sideways which would send you rocketing to the ground for a not-so-fun-time.  Jump-jetting as it stands is already useful for maneuvering the map and for catching enemies unaware sometimes.
It makes no sense for balance and it makes no sense with the mech's current thruster systems.

For the mech to dodge mid air, it would have to stop powering its vertical thrusters and point them sideways.  Yes, thank you captain obvious.  Just as currently, after dodging, the mech must point thrusters downwards to jet up.

But do you agree that there would be some hang time while in the air after jetting_

Dont you think that's plenty of hang time to press 2 keys on your keyboard to initiate a dodge_

Given how quickly you'll fall to the ground after releasing your jets, don't you think that greatly limits the distance you'll be able to air dodge_

Considering how little time it takes to transition from ground dodge to jetting, why do you assume there is suddenly this long transition time between jetting and air dodging_

If you would put two seconds of thought into it, you'd realize that yes, it makes perfect sense with the mech's current thruster systems.

[The_Silencer]

Hmm.. if we're basing this discussion in physics and current mech model pieces then... adding new pieces and/or new thruster emit_points to the models would be something pretty easy to do. That in order to improve current air combat/tactics...

[MK501]

I don't like the idea of a mid air dodge ( at least not in Hawken ).
Considering you're piloting a steel beast that weighs several tons, the dash move is already crazy, though that one is perfectly in place. The first time I played a match in alpha, I was surprised the jetpacks could lift the mechs so high, but it didn't feel wrong at the same time. Now a mid air dodge would take away all credibility of the current mech abilities.
I believe the current cocktail of mech movements is a perfect blend of some of the finest ingredients available, adding more would spoil it.

[Ace4225]

the reason our minds go toward AC when we see dodging is because no other mech game really used it. We're not talking about it feeling like AC in terms of how it will look/function, but it feeling like AC as a game overall.

You talk about mid-air dodging in Hawken as if you know exactly what it'll look like and how it'll function. Truth is, you don't. Not even the devs do. No one can say for sure that it would be practical or usable. [or that it would not, BUT...]

Frankly, imo, with how many ppl already dodge into walls because of their lack of practice / difficulty seeing on the maps, I can just picture ppl wasting mid-air dodges dodging into high walls, esp since we have such a low height cap [which there's another thread discussing whether it should be raised]

The dodge mechanics work well in AC because of how many other things you can do with jets in AC. Hawken's maneuvering is very limited in comparison, and I just don't see it providing an edge.

Maneuvering in this game is plenty fun/difficult without mid-air dodges. What you're proposing would widen the gap between skilled players and noobs and sharpen the learning curve even more than it already is.

Edited by Ace4225, November 19 2012 - 02:42 PM.

[Timber_Wolf]

RedVan, on November 19 2012 - 07:18 AM, said:

stuff

First, I never said it was hard to -input- on a keyboard.  Nor was I discussing the speed at which thrusters can rotate.
Second, the physics just don't work in game.  When you jumpjet in hawken and land you come to a full stop and have to start up again, same with boosting forward.  The mech has to basically land and get its feet square on the ground again.
Try this:  jump straight up and at the top of your jump have someone push into your side with a good amount of force to propel you a decent distance sideways and land even.  Now you weight at least 20 times what you do and your legs have half the movement potential they currently have.  Also you have no quick, easy way to stand up.

There'd be hangtime, sure, followed by your top-heavy mech slamming into the ground.

[RedVan]

Ace4225, on November 19 2012 - 02:40 PM, said:

the reason our minds go toward AC when we see dodging is because no other mech game really used it. We're not talking about it feeling like AC in terms of how it will look/function, but it feeling like AC as a game overall.

1st:  FME had dodge, so yes, other mech games have used it
2nd:  If the movement is as different as it is between HAWKEN and AC, then the feeling of the game is also completely different.  Adding an extremely limited air dodge to HAWKEN will not make it feel like AC where you buzz around like a bee in the air.

Quote

You talk about mid-air dodging in Hawken as if you know exactly what it'll look like and how it'll function. Truth is, you don't. Not even the devs do. No one can say for sure that it would be practical or usable. [or that it would not, BUT...]

You're right, I don't know exactly how it will play out.
What I do know:
1. Jetting in the air is completely worthless in combat.  Any benefit you get out of it will be negated, plus some, by the disadvantage of being the easiest target in the books.
2.  I do know it will be nothing like AC.  Due to the limits I've already stated (perhaps you should read more than one page), there is no possible way for it to become like AC.
3.  I do know that if you give people the ability to air dodge, people will be more likely to jet in combat, because they'll have a small out to avoid a couple of shots.  I also know that people will need to learn how to properly use this, just as people need to learn how to properly use ground dodge.

Quote

Frankly, imo, with how many ppl already dodge into walls because of their lack of practice / difficulty seeing on the maps, I can just picture ppl wasting mid-air dodges dodging into high walls, esp since we have such a low height cap [which there's another thread discussing whether it should be raised]

Bad players will be bad regardless of how you make a game.  Adding something as small as this won't make them any worse.

Quote

The dodge mechanics work well in AC because of how many other things you can do with jets in AC. Hawken's maneuvering is very limited in comparison, and I just don't see it providing an edge.

The dodge mechanics work well in AC, that's just fine and dandy!
The dodge mechanics I'm talking about are nothing like AC!  So don't waste my time comparing them.

Quote

Maneuvering in this game is plenty fun/difficult without mid-air dodges. What you're proposing would widen the gap between skilled players and noobs and sharpen the learning curve even more than it already is.

No it wouldn't.  If people can't figure out how to dodge on the ground, they're not going to be any worse off if they can't figure out how to dodge in the air.

Timber_Wolf, on November 19 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

RedVan, on November 19 2012 - 07:18 AM, said:

stuff

First, I never said it was hard to -input- on a keyboard.  Nor was I discussing the speed at which thrusters can rotate.
Second, the physics just don't work in game.  When you jumpjet in hawken and land you come to a full stop and have to start up again, same with boosting forward.  The mech has to basically land and get its feet square on the ground again.
Try this:  jump straight up and at the top of your jump have someone push into your side with a good amount of force to propel you a decent distance sideways and land even.  Now you weight at least 20 times what you do and your legs have half the movement potential they currently have.  Also you have no quick, easy way to stand up.

There'd be hangtime, sure, followed by your top-heavy mech slamming into the ground.

I've already stated many a time:  Don't bother bringing "real life" physics into it.

If you want to argue real life, here's the quick easy:  Mechs don't exist.

As for the thruster rotation, yes, you did bring that up:

Timber_Wolf, on November 18 2012 - 07:37 PM, said:

For the mech to dodge midair it would have to stop powering its vertical thrusters and point them sideways which would send you rocketing to the ground for a not-so-fun-time.  ...
It makes no sense for balance and it makes no sense with the mech's current thruster systems.

sorry.

And yes, the mech lands, has to stop for a split second before carrying on... So what_  After jetting, then air dodging, the same would be in effect, it would need to stop for a split second before carrying on.

Edited by RedVan, November 19 2012 - 06:19 PM.

[Ace4225]

it's fine. You can just ignore this if you want..

Ace4225, on November 19 2012 - 02:40 PM, said:

Frankly, imo, with how many ppl already dodge into walls because of their lack of practice / difficulty seeing on the maps, I can just picture ppl wasting mid-air dodges dodging into high walls, esp since we have such a low height cap [which there's another thread discussing whether it should be raised]

The dodge mechanics work well in AC because of how many other things you can do with jets in AC. Hawken's maneuvering is very limited in comparison, and I just don't see it providing an edge.

Maneuvering in this game is plenty fun/difficult without mid-air dodges. What you're proposing would widen the gap between skilled players and noobs and sharpen the learning curve even more than it already is.

[RedVan]

No worries, I edited to prove that wrong

[Ace4225]

You didn't prove anyone wrong. You just hastily shot down opinions different from yours with equally [if not moreso] opinionative statements.

You want to deal in facts, get some facts. Otherwise, deal in concepts. Right now, your attitude stinks worse than a fuzzy elephant in summer.

Edited by Ace4225, November 19 2012 - 06:32 PM.

[Ace4225]

RedVan, on November 19 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

Bad players will be bad regardless of how you make a game.  Adding something as small as this won't make them any worse.

1. This isn't a "small" suggestion you are making. In order to successfully implement mid-air dodging, you'd have to:

-program new animations for each air-dodge for each chassis
-add new physics to govern how mechs fall, are shot down, and are stopped during/after mid-air dodging
-place limitations on how air dodging works; I.E. only one dodge can be attempted, and then upward thrust can't be used afterward [which would suck for people who dodge into a long drop]
-rework the whole tech tree [again]
-rework internals [again]
-rework items [again]
-place greater limits on mid-air maneuvering in maps
-etc etc

2. No. Players that are somewhat bad at the game would be even worse at it if they had yet another complicated control they had to remember. On the other hand, players who have the coordination to handle all that dodging would master yet another skill over noobs. So, yes, it would widen the player gap. Just because you don't think you won't be affected, don't think for a moment the millions of other nerds/casual gamers out there won't.

I've played against quite a few people that couldn't even handle the dodging we have in the game now, and they had hard time with me cuz I was so "dodgy"

3. It's rude to tell off Timber Wolf for thinking about it realistically, because:

-This game is attempting to be somewhat realistic/immersive [at least as realistic as possible]
-The current jet system does respond realistically, considering the mechs' weight
-he has a point; if you were to dodge in the air, then lose any further control over jets, [as you suggested] gravity and inertia would have to keep you going sideways while pulling you down, and that landing won't be fun, realistic or not.

[RedVan]

Ace4225, on November 19 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:

You didn't prove anyone wrong. You just hastily shot down opinions different from yours with equally [if not moreso] opinionative statements.

You want to deal in facts, get some facts. Otherwise, deal in concepts. Right now, your attitude stinks worse than a fuzzy elephant in summer.

I have no problem dealing in concepts.  Problem is, everyone else tries to deal in "realism", which I continually tell them not to.  Then they try to compare it to AC, which I continually tell them not to.

Perhaps we'll get somewhere when people stop doing this.

[Ace4225]

we're not dealing in realism so much as immersion [which has to feel realistic in order to be immersive]

And perhaps we wouldn't compare it so much to AC if it didn't sound so much like an AC-related idea.

Perhaps we'll get somewhere when you stop defending your OP and start giving yourself a little flexibility to think about how new jet features could be implemented in a better way.

Edited by Ace4225, November 19 2012 - 07:03 PM.

[DM30]

RedVan, on November 19 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

Ace4225, on November 19 2012 - 06:30 PM, said:

You didn't prove anyone wrong. You just hastily shot down opinions different from yours with equally [if not moreso] opinionative statements.

You want to deal in facts, get some facts. Otherwise, deal in concepts. Right now, your attitude stinks worse than a fuzzy elephant in summer.

I have no problem dealing in concepts.  Problem is, everyone else tries to deal in "realism", which I continually tell them not to.  Then they try to compare it to AC, which I continually tell them not to.

Perhaps we'll get somewhere when people stop doing this.

I wasn't aware that you were God in this forum, and all other posters have to conform to your restrictions on what they're allowed to state in their opinions/arguments.

The only thing I'm really getting out of your arguments is that you want the game to change it's mechanics to suit your preferences, instead of learning how to cope with what's already implemented.

Yes, jumping in the middle of a battle zone can be a good way to get killed. Simple solution: Don't do it! Use your jets in a way they're actually effective, such as getting to high ground while removed from the battle, then get the drop on your enemy from above. In my experience, unless players are paying attention, a lot of them won't notice a mech standing on a building above them until it starts shooting.

Edited by DM30, November 19 2012 - 07:08 PM.

[Timber_Wolf]

RedVan, on November 19 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

more stuff

1.  No, I never said how fast it could rotate thrusters, you're bad at reading.
2.  The game, while not a sim, is much more realistic and grounded in reality than Eastern mecha (AC, Gundam, whatever) and as such, real world physics do apply at least partially do this game.  
3.  Mechs not existing is a silly point, especially when there are applications being researched.  Boston Dynamic's Big Dog, anyone_  Bringing that up doesn't really prove any point.
4.  As far as jumping in combat not serving a purpose:  don't jump_  You wouldn't jump around in a war in front of your enemy, would you_ These are big, somewhat crude, mechs that can barely fly as it is.
5.  That "split second" of not being able to move_  Congratulations, I just HEAT cannoned and HE charged you while you were immobile.  Even less mobile than if you had just dashed on the ground I might add.  Oh, and while you were slowly moving in the air_  Yeah, that was a HEAT round you ate too while I was dodging on the ground where I don't suffer slowdown from dashing.  

The amount of fuel you would burn to fly and then dash would leave you totally helpless upon landing.  Even if you ignore real life physics and the fact your mech would be a smoldering heap upon land, you're still dead from game mechanics.  You fly slowly and burn half your fuel, dash and burn more, land, become immobile for a second, wait for your dodge to recharge, and then have enough fuel for, what_  One more dash_  That's assuming the enemy pilot wasn't terrible and you're still alive, of course.

The amount you would have to do to make jumping useful in combat in this game would require way more than just an air dodge.  Vertical thrust is pretty weak, you can't effectively dodge upwards to avoid missiles.  Flight speed is already pretty low, and dodging in air would be fairly predictable and the changes you're suggesting have the potential to make falling damage an issue if you can't boost vertically after a dodge, again, assuming you even had the fuel to do so.  There are certain things I do want changed with the vertical game in Hawken, specifically letting us boost upwards as long as we have the fuel to do so, but mid-air dodge_  No.

Now, 180 spin on the other hand...

Edited by Timber_Wolf, November 19 2012 - 08:46 PM.

[RedVan]

Timber_Wolf, on November 19 2012 - 08:45 PM, said:

RedVan, on November 19 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

more stuff

1.  No, I never said how fast it could rotate thrusters, you're bad at reading.

I do believe I included this in my second to last post:

Timber_Wolf, on November 18 2012 - 07:37 PM, said:

For the mech to dodge midair it would have to stop powering its vertical thrusters and point them sideways which would send you rocketing to the ground for a not-so-fun-time.  ...
It makes no sense for balance and it makes no sense with the mech's current thruster systems.

If the vertical thrusters need to be pointed sideways, would they not rotate_  If you're rocketing to the ground, you're implying that the said thrusters did not rotate fast enough to initiate the dodge before hitting the ground.  Currently, if you jet up, and release jets at an altitude where you would still technically have enough to initiate a dodge, there is enough hang time to do so.  You do not go rocketing to the ground.

Quote

2.  The game, while not a sim, is much more realistic and grounded in reality than Eastern mecha (AC, Gundam, whatever) and as such, real world physics do apply at least partially do this game.
3.  Mechs not existing is a silly point, especially when there are applications being researched.  Boston Dynamic's Big Dog, anyone_  Bringing that up doesn't really prove any point.

The point is: it's a game.
Yes, there are people working on rl mechs, but, this game is based long in the future, where they have technologies far more advanced than we do.  Who are you to say they aren't capable of air dodge_

Quote

4.  As far as jumping in combat not serving a purpose:  don't jump_  You wouldn't jump around in a war in front of your enemy, would you_ These are big, somewhat crude, mechs that can barely fly as it is.

Thank you for helping my point!  Don't jump!  I know I sure don't.  There's no reason to, you just open yourself up to a world of pain when you jump in combat.

That is the precise reason I suggest adding an air dodge.

Quote

5.  That "split second" of not being able to move_  Congratulations, I just HEAT cannoned and HE charged you while you were immobile.  Even less mobile than if you had just dashed on the ground I might add.  Oh, and while you were slowly moving in the air_  Yeah, that was a HEAT round you ate too while I was dodging on the ground where I don't suffer slowdown from dashing.

This is exactly what keeps it from being like AC!  Thank you again for helping my point!  Air dodge would have limitations and disadvantages, just like anything else!  Perhaps you're jetting to get an angle advantage for a TOW shot, then you see someone lining up on you, now, rather than being a sitting duck in the air, you have an alternative.  Perhaps it will serve you well, perhaps it wont.  Air dodge isn't supposed to be a "get out of jail free" card.

Quote

The amount of fuel you would burn to fly and then dash would leave you totally helpless upon landing.  Even if you ignore real life physics and the fact your mech would be a smoldering heap upon land, you're still dead from game mechanics.  You fly slowly and burn half your fuel, dash and burn more, land, become immobile for a second, wait for your dodge to recharge, and then have enough fuel for, what_  One more dash_  That's assuming the enemy pilot wasn't terrible and you're still alive, of course.

A smoldering heap upon landing_  Lol really_  So, currently mechs can jet up right_  And they land right_  Are they smoldering heaps when they land_  No.  Since you need to conserve energy enough to air dodge, that means you're not going to be jetting as high, which means you're even less likely to become a smoldering heap, which doesn't happen anyway.

And yes, perhaps you do fly slowly up, air dodge, land and have no fuel.  That's part of the risk of using air dodge.  Some times the risk will offer reward, other times it will not.  As I said before:  It's not a "get out of jail free" card.

Quote

The amount you would have to do to make jumping useful in combat in this game would require way more than just an air dodge.  Vertical thrust is pretty weak, you can't effectively dodge upwards to avoid missiles.  Flight speed is already pretty low, and dodging in air would be fairly predictable and the changes you're suggesting have the potential to make falling damage an issue if you can't boost vertically after a dodge, again, assuming you even had the fuel to do so.

Perhaps it would require more than just air dodge.  At least I'm suggesting something that can help the vertical aspect of the game rather than just sitting on my thumbs.

And no, the jets don't offer a "dodge" upwards to avoid missiles.  That's irrelevant.  The mechs can dodge on the ground, if they can do it on the ground with increased friction, then they certainly can do it in the air.

And how is dodging in the air any more predictable than dodging on the ground_  There already is a dodge cool down, so currently on the ground, after dodging, it's pretty predictable where you'll be for a split second.  That wont be any different if you were to air dodge.

I already discussed how falling damage wont be an issue...

Quote

There are certain things I do want changed with the vertical game in Hawken, specifically letting us boost upwards as long as we have the fuel to do so, but mid-air dodge_  No.

Now, 180 spin on the other hand...

Perfectly fine if you don't agree, I don't care.  I'm only here to show how your reasons for disagreeing aren't issues.

[RedVan]

DM30, on November 19 2012 - 07:05 PM, said:

I wasn't aware that you were God in this forum, and all other posters have to conform to your restrictions on what they're allowed to state in their opinions/arguments.

I'm not making anyone conform to my restrictions, I'm explaining how peoples issues with my suggestion are wrong.  That's how debates work.  I give my side, they give their side, we tell each other why the other is wrong.

Quote

The only thing I'm really getting out of your arguments is that you want the game to change it's mechanics to suit your preferences, instead of learning how to cope with what's already implemented.

Oh I cope quite well with the current implementation.  Yes indeed I do.

Quote

Yes, jumping in the middle of a battle zone can be a good way to get killed. Simple solution: Don't do it! Use your jets in a way they're actually effective, such as getting to high ground while removed from the battle, then get the drop on your enemy from above. In my experience, unless players are paying attention, a lot of them won't notice a mech standing on a building above them until it starts shooting.

Thank you for supporting my argument   That's my whole point to wanting to add air dodge, there's no reason to use jets while in combat.

Ace4225, on November 19 2012 - 07:03 PM, said:

we're not dealing in realism so much as immersion [which has to feel realistic in order to be immersive]

And perhaps we wouldn't compare it so much to AC if it didn't sound so much like an AC-related idea.

Perhaps we'll get somewhere when you stop defending your OP and start giving yourself a little flexibility to think about how new jet features could be implemented in a better way.

I can understand how it sounds like an AC related idea at first glance.  But then I went on to clearly show how it is completely different from AC, yet people still try to compare it to AC.  Perhaps everyone else needs to have a little flexibility to think about how new jet features could be implemented in a better way.  Because as far as I'm concerned, nobody else is thinking about anything other than HAWKEN = AC.

Ace4225, on November 19 2012 - 06:48 PM, said:

RedVan, on November 19 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

Bad players will be bad regardless of how you make a game.  Adding something as small as this won't make them any worse.

1. This isn't a "small" suggestion you are making. In order to successfully implement mid-air dodging, you'd have to:

-program new animations for each air-dodge for each chassis why would the animation have to be any different, just take the sparks out that are caused by grinding against the ground
-add new physics to govern how mechs fall, are shot down, and are stopped during/after mid-air dodging the physics of how mechs fall and are shot down are already in place.  Imagine you dodge over the edge of a bridge, then get shot down, how is that any different than if you were in the air due to an air dodge, as opposed to a cliff dodge_  As for stopping, same story:  Dodge over the edge of a bridge, you stop moving horizontally eventually don't you_  And it's rather quick isn't it_  Explain to me how this is different_
-place limitations on how air dodging works; I.E. only one dodge can be attempted, and then upward thrust can't be used afterward [which would suck for people who dodge into a long drop]  Already did put limitations as to how it would work in a prior post.  One air dodge per "flight time", horizontal distance limit just as it currently is, and there's no point in saying up thrust cant be used directly after, that will solely be based on how much energy you have, which won't be much
-rework the whole tech tree [again] No, there is absolutely no reason to have to rework the tech tree, you'll have to do a little more to prove that you would need to
-rework internals [again]  Again, nope.
-rework items [again]  How in the hell do you get the idea that items are related to air dodge_  Do you think a turret suddenly isn't going to be able to hit a target dodging in the air_  Is an EMPs blast radius suddenly inefficient simply because the target dodging is a few feet of the ground__  You're stretching really far as to what would need to be changed to implement air dodge
-place greater limits on mid-air maneuvering in maps  I already explained the limits to air dodge, which are quite good limits actually.  Fits well with the whole "risk reward" system.
-etc etc etc is not a valid argument.  If you really want to say IT AINT GONNA WORK at least come up with valid arguments.

2. No. Players that are somewhat bad at the game would be even worse at it if they had yet another complicated control they had to remember. On the other hand, players who have the coordination to handle all that dodging would master yet another skill over noobs. So, yes, it would widen the player gap. Just because you don't think you won't be affected, don't think for a moment the millions of other nerds/casual gamers out there won't.

I've played against quite a few people that couldn't even handle the dodging we have in the game now, and they had hard time with me cuz I was so "dodgy"

Like I said, those players will always suck.  I just find it silly that you think it such a complicated control to air dodge, simply because you're a few feet off the ground.  Hint:  The buttons are still the same!  It may take you a while to wrap your head around that, but anyone who's played any amount of FPS' in their life will not have a problem with such a small addition.

Quote

3. It's rude to tell off Timber Wolf for thinking about it realistically, because:

-This game is attempting to be somewhat realistic/immersive [at least as realistic as possible]
-The current jet system does respond realistically, considering the mechs' weight  Yes, it responds "realistically", according to the realism that the devs built for their universe.  But as I said before, this is a universe in the future, who are you to say what reality is_
-he has a point; if you were to dodge in the air, then lose any further control over jets, [as you suggested] gravity and inertia would have to keep you going sideways while pulling you down, and that landing won't be fun, realistic or not.  If you dodge over the edge of a bridge, gravity and inertia would keep you going sideways while pulling you down, and the landing is fun, realistic or not.  See how your arguments can already be resolved by current game mechanics_  Please consider this before making it into an argument.

[Ace4225]

RedVan, on November 20 2012 - 06:33 AM, said:

I'm not making anyone conform to my restrictions, I'm explaining how peoples issues with my suggestion are wrong.  That's how debates work.  I give my side, they give their side, we tell each other why the other is wrong.

1. This isn't a debate panel, it's a forum

2. You're the only one [rudely] telling people they're wrong. [Although I'm telling you you're wrong now because of how you're acting toward the rest of us.]

[RedVan]

Ace4225, on November 20 2012 - 09:19 AM, said:

RedVan, on November 20 2012 - 06:33 AM, said:

I'm not making anyone conform to my restrictions, I'm explaining how peoples issues with my suggestion are wrong.  That's how debates work.  I give my side, they give their side, we tell each other why the other is wrong.

1. This isn't a debate panel, it's a forum

This your first forum sun_

Forum:  A meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.

That is precisely what is going on here

Quote

2. You're the only one [rudely] telling people they're wrong. [Although I'm telling you you're wrong now because of how you're acting toward the rest of us.]

Actually, most people have been saying air dodge is a bad idea, and then proceed to give bad reasons as to why.  When I have to repeat myself over and over (its a game, its not realistic.  It's nothing like AC, etc etc etc...), it pisses me off.

Perhaps if people would open their minds a little and look outside the realms of what they are assuming I mean by air dodge, and start looking at how it would actually look within hawken, we could get somewhere.

I am still waiting to hear any response to how I say air dodge would function within the game.  All people have been saying is "too much like AC.  Not realistic." and dont actually look at the points I bring up that show how this would work.  They prefer to look past everything I say, and just say "i dont like your attitude".

I have quite a list going for you to counter.  Feel free to start any time.

Edited by RedVan, November 20 2012 - 09:36 AM.

[Ace4225]

Actually, I already listed why I think it's a bad idea [besides the AC-related nature of it]. In response, you just re-worded your earlier arguments in ways that were totally inappropriate [you worded your ideas as if they're already facts, when in fact, it's likely they won't work the way you intend them to]

And if you want to turn this thread into a debate panel, fine. Do it on your own. I'm out.

by the way, congratulations on managing to get everyone in this thread fuzzy bunny'd at you.

Edited by Ace4225, November 20 2012 - 09:42 AM.