81 replies to this topic

[Nept]

 

*Edit - June 23rd*

 

Would appreciate some feedback from participating players on our current bans: Repair Kit, Advanced Repair Kit, Basic Extractor, and Extractor.  Thoughts? 

 

----------------------------------------

 

 

I'm starting this thread with an immediate disclaimer: TPG may decide against implementing additional restrictions, regardless of these discussions.  Please refrain from dramatics.  Remember that although you (or your team) may not enjoy certain mechanics, you cannot speak for the league at large, and you may not have its best interests in mind.  Teams sometimes invoke restrictions as a means of strengthening their own position - a phenomenon that occurs not only in Hawken, but across competition everywhere.  And as we saw with TPG's Siege Cup, people often demand restrictions rather than exercise their tactical and strategic thought.

 

Implementing restrictions typically stymies that very strategery and tacticoolery.  Further limiting mech classes, for example, would see most teams running very similar compositions while punishing those with more flexibility.  Of course, some mechanics limit strategic options while slowing gameplay to a crawl (see: Scanner) and, in our opinion, are best removed.  Finally, remember that restrictions can cause logistical issues.  Namely, the more restrictions we run, the more infractions and complaints we're likely to encounter.

 

That being said, we're open to suggestions and discussions.  I myself may not participate a great deal during these debates (lots of writing this weekend), but I assure you that we're considering your arguments.

 

Anyway, have at 'er.  A few contentious topics that deserve discussion are:

• Orb Lordin'
• EMPs
• Mech Restrictions (will peruse any arguments that arise over this topic, although further restrictions are unlikely)
• Map Selection and Side Selection
• Air Compressor (Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaha)
• Holotaunts (thanks Crafty)

But feel free to discuss whatever else comes up.

Edited by Nept, 23 June 2015 - 09:27 AM.

[CraftyDus]

holotaunt ban, unfair advantage

 

[OmniStone]

I say we ban the extractor, that should nerf the orb lord build to the point where people might actually bring other items.

[ThirdEyE]

I think we should do some test scrims with different restrictions to see which restrictions are best for orbs.  Extractor is a decent start but I would like to try no orbs, Mk 1 only, Mk 2 max with no extractor, etc.  This might be time consuming though and not sure how long people want to wait to start the season.

[Nept]

If orb restrictions were implemented, they'd be just that - restrictions.  We wouldn't remove them completely.

[KejiGoto]

I think we should do some test scrims with different restrictions to see which restrictions are best for orbs.  Extractor is a decent start but I would like to try no orbs, Mk 1 only, Mk 2 max with no extractor, etc.  This might be time consuming though and not sure how long people want to wait to start the season.

 

That seems like it might be a little too complicated to keep track of during matches in terms of limiting internals based on what level of an item that mech was equipped.

It would probably be easier to simply remove the repair orb item from TPG play in order to keep orb lording to a minimum. This lets the extractor still do its job with repair orbs from fallen mechs. Even at Mk 1 if the mode isn't TDM there's not much stopping a player from killing themselves whenever they use that one orb they have and jumping right back in with a fresh set of items.

[LoC_TR]

I'm leaning towards just removing the orb rather than extractor, extractor is really powerful but only because you and everyone else is pooping orbs out everywhere. You could also consider using the "no death orbs" mod, but I like the former so there is a reward for killing. 

[IareDave]

Removing orbs will just open the floodgates to emp mk.3 cheese spam and dets. The best fix imo, while still leaving the build viable, is removing the ext or repair kit (which also increases hp/s). 

[Silverfire]

Remove Rep Kit imo, Ext has uses, if not that, then other way around.

[OmegaNull]

I think orb lording should be removed. AC is fine. Though removing the orb would not be a bad idea. Also, EMP can be a bit over powered. I think adding restrictions to those 2 items will force a team to solely focus on skill and teamwork.

Edited by -vR.OmegaNull, 06 June 2015 - 08:02 PM.

[Silverfire]

EMP is quite powerful, one of the true game changers in a situation. I don't feel as if restricting it is good, but it needs to be to prevent abuse.

Orbs are just selfish though. I wouldn't restrict orb but rather the internals that enable orblording until either internals or the orb itself is brought back in line.

[LEmental]

Orb lord:

Ban repair charges.  Extractor and repair kit are still good.  I think we should test this in our scrims.

 

Emps:

I think are fine.  Don't clump up.  Don't play so many C's

 

Mech restrictions:

Unlimited A's

Unlimited B's

3 C's (or unlimited C's)

 

Map selection:

Wreckage

Origin

Front Line

 

Ban everything else (let's all be honest, maps in Hawken are super pretty, but they suck)

 

Also:

Remove kill cam

Edited by LEmental, 06 June 2015 - 09:08 PM.

[crockrocket]

Personally I'm going to go against restrictions of any kind. In some ways tpg is kind of a unique testing ground for Hawken meta, and I think that is valuable. If you want to base decisions off of what the current meta is, you are A: missing out on a chance for experimentation in order to counter the "OP thing" and B: missing out on a chance to show the devs why X actually is OP.

 

I can understand the appeal of pushing for a better competitive season via restrictions, and won't be upset if limited restrictions are enacted. I will however push for a restriction free season.

[PsychedelicGrass]

No items

No internals, not even AC

No daves

Everyone must use a tech

[Amidatelion]

I say we ban the extractor, that should nerf the orb lord build to the point where people might actually bring other items.

 

Remove Rep Kit imo, Ext has uses, if not that, then other way around.

 

If we were doing Siege, I'd agree with you Silverfire, but for MA, extractor is pretty pointless other than orblording.

 

If orblording is going to be restricted I'd be down with ditching extractor.

 

 

Map selection:

Wreckage

Origin

Front Line

 

Why do you hate fun, LE.

Edited by Amidatelion, 07 June 2015 - 06:54 AM.

[eth0]

Leave items and internals as-is but don't have health orbs drop on death. No indicators is awesome, too, but that's just because.

 

Holo use should be required.

[_incitatus]

Holograms and holo-taunts should be mandatory to bring the emerging holo meta into comp play.

Aside from that, I'm fine with the existing TPG rules.

[M1lkshake]

I believe orbs aren't as bad as a lot of people seem to think they are. Granted, I feel that they're an obvious choice to have no matter what mech or playstyle you choose, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they gimp competitive gameplay. For example, a lot of people tend to think that the number of EMPs a team has determines if they win or not. While EMPs can certainly be effective when used properly, it doesn't mean that there are no counter-strategies available. Similarly, a team that carries more orbs than another isn't granted certain victory.

 

Restricting the number of items (for any item, not just orbs) is likely to be a nightmare to enforce for TPG admins.

 

I think orbs should be used to get back into the fight faster (while healing behind lines), and certainly as a reward for killing an enemy player.  Alternatively, the orblord build encourages a completely different playstyle, where players to simply jump from orb to orb rather than try to avoid damage effectively. Different playstyles are fine, but it's not very difficult to sit on an orb and shoot someone, and with this build it can sometimes be more effective than dodging and moving around. I guarantee that players restricted from using this particular build would find themselves playing worse, or differently.

 

In short, I would vote to ban the extractor. It's much more easily enforced (anyone can see if you're using it when you kill them), and still allows those who use orbs to utilize them effectively, although obviously not as much as before.

[ThirdEyE]

I believe orbs aren't as bad as a lot of people seem to think they are. Granted, I feel that they're an obvious choice to have no matter what mech or playstyle you choose, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they gimp competitive gameplay. For example, a lot of people tend to think that the number of EMPs a team has determines if they win or not. While EMPs can certainly be effective when used properly, it doesn't mean that there are no counter-strategies available. Similarly, a team that carries more orbs than another isn't granted certain victory.

 

Restricting the number of items (for any item, not just orbs) is likely to be a nightmare to enforce for TPG admins.

 

I think orbs should be used to get back into the fight faster (while healing behind lines), and certainly as a reward for killing an enemy player.  Alternatively, the orblord build encourages a completely different playstyle, where players to simply jump from orb to orb rather than try to avoid damage effectively. Different playstyles are fine, but it's not very difficult to sit on an orb and shoot someone, and with this build it can sometimes be more effective than dodging and moving around. I guarantee that players restricted from using this particular build would find themselves playing worse, or differently.

 

In short, I would vote to ban the extractor. It's much more easily enforced (anyone can see if you're using it when you kill them), and still allows those who use orbs to utilize them effectively, although obviously not as much as before.

So you're saying orbs aren't as bad as people think they are simply because they don't guarantee your team a win?  If so, that is absurd.

 

Orbs offer the most bang for the buck item-wise, disproportionately so for certain classes.  A single orb provides ~50% of an A-class health with no internals, which quite obviously skews the balance of class health.  With more than 1 orb, you can basically throw base health out the window since the total damage required to kill an A class can suddenly become the same as is required to kill a C class, or more when you also have deflectors equipped.  Many people will just throw an orb out to start the fight so they have an effectively higher health pool and thus a significantly higher chance of winning an engagement with basically no effort.

 

Certain mechs and weapons are heavily gimped by orbs as they simply don't have the dps to counter them, or they are designed as more of a harassing/zoning tool (eoc, hellfires, etc.).  Even mechs like the G2Raider which rely on heavy burst play are gimped further since their burst means nothing if they don't have the dps to back it up.  I know G2Raider is kind of a running joke in the comp scene but it illustrates the problems with orbs well.  Tech has also seen a drastic decrease in popularity as orbs are simply a safer and more convenient option, as everyone on your team can have the extra health without sacrificing firepower.  You arguably get more health from orbs than from a tech (as a whole team).

 

Imo banning extractor alone won't solve anything.  Yes the rate at which you gain health with extractor is also ridiculous but the total amount of health is what's most important (for current base absorption rate).  Outside of combat, the difference between repairing with and without orbs is huge and can easily make or break a fight when you have to sit down for 4-6 seconds instead of 10-13 (depending on class and other internals).

 

This one item changes the game in such a drastic way that I honestly don't understand how people are fine with it.  Do you just think hawken would be less enjoyable if you didn't have free health everywhere?  There have been no serious arguments in here as to WHY orbs are a good thing for comp hawken.  Dave is kinda close with the meta shifting from one cheesy strat to the next, except that emp is already very popular as is so it's not really changing much.  Besides, justifying keeping an op item unrestricted by claiming that another arguably op item will take it's place is pretty silly, don't you think?

 

So really, why are orbs a good thing?  Why would hawken be worse without them?

[LEmental]

How about, rather than theory craft no orbs, we spend some time playing with no orbs.

[crockrocket]

How about, rather than theory craft no orbs, we spend some time playing with no orbs.

 

Did someone say Funtime Science Fridays?

[DieselCat]

Just a thought..maybe a concept of different loadouts as teams progress through the progressive rounds of play..

 

round 1...totally stripped mechs..no items or internals

 

round 2...limited restricted items and internals

 

round 3...fully loaded mechs with items and internals. No restrictions for the (finals, or however many rounds it takes to get there)

 

*+

[Rei]

I wonder, what about playing with no MK3 items?

 

I mean, just as a test to see how people like it, but I'm really all for little to no restrictions other than scanner.

Edited by Rei, 07 June 2015 - 12:45 PM.

[Elite_is_salty]

No items

No internals, not even AC

No daves

Everyone must use a tech

 

[Nept]

This one item changes the game in such a drastic way that I honestly don't understand how people are fine with it.  Do you just think hawken would be less enjoyable if you didn't have free health everywhere?  There have been no serious arguments in here as to WHY orbs are a good thing for comp hawken.  Dave is kinda close with the meta shifting from one cheesy strat to the next, except that emp is already very popular as is so it's not really changing much.  Besides, justifying keeping an op item unrestricted by claiming that another arguably op item will take it's place is pretty silly, don't you think?

 

So really, why are orbs a good thing?  Why would hawken be worse without them?

 

That's pretty simple.  You even pointed it out in your post:

 

the difference between repairing with and without orbs is huge and can easily make or break a fight when you have to sit down for 4-6 seconds instead of 10-13 (depending on class and other internals)

 

Orbs allow teams greater aggression through decreased downtime.  If they're willing to sacrifice EMPs for orbs - in other words, fewer shutdown opportunities for more healing - then so be it.  That's not a problem.  And if it were a problem, so too would be EMPs with their tendency to remove an opponent's offensive capabilities.  Throw in some strong language while bending the argument to your preferred playstyle, and you could generate similar outrage.

 

For me, the largest orb-related issue is their combat absorption rate.  A- and B-classes shouldn't be facetanking damage with orbs - not that much, anyway.  Assuming 100% accuracy, mechs shouldn't overheat while attempting to kill orb-lording lights and mediums.  We saw similar issues with earlier iterations of the tech, whereby both the tech and their target were essentially invincible against single opponents.  The problems were resolved by dramatically decreasing healing rates and dropping health pools across the board.

 

. . . Which reminds me, remember that orb lording is far from the only (or even primary) reason that techs aren't as popular as they once were.  We've shifted from TDM to MA and, in so doing, from a gametype that promotes passive play to one that punishes it.  Incinerators and their tiny fuel tanks aren't regulars on most MA maps, regardless of their tech synergy; and perhaps teams have finally removed themselves from that silly "meta" mindset whereby every team had to run the Omni or HFC composition.

Edited by Nept, 07 June 2015 - 02:20 PM.

[_incitatus]

Regarding orbs, I do find it quite fun to play when mechs don't drop them upon death. Really cuts down on the orb lord problem.

[ThirdEyE]

That's pretty simple.  You even pointed it out in your post:

 

Orbs allow teams greater aggression through decreased downtime.  If they're willing to sacrifice EMPs for orbs - in other words, fewer shutdown opportunities for more healing - then so be it.  That's not a problem.  And if it were a problem, so too would be EMPs with their tendency to remove an opponent's offensive capabilities.  Throw in some strong language while bending the argument to your preferred playstyle, and you could generate similar outrage.

That's a pretty weak reason given all the downsides listed.  Orbs heavily favor defense more than offense by their nature of being stationary health buffs.  Decreased repair time can be argued one way or the other as being good/bad anyway.  I think base repair speed is a bit slow but orbs make it a joke.

 

And like I said regarding orbs vs emps:  Besides, justifying keeping an op item unrestricted by claiming that another arguably op item will take it's place is pretty silly, don't you think?  If these are the only two items being discussed here, doesn't that indicate some kind of problem?

[Nept]

That's a pretty weak reason given all the downsides listed.  Orbs heavily favor defense more than offense by their nature of being stationary health buffs.  Decreased repair time can be argued one way or the other as being good/bad anyway.  I think base repair speed is a bit slow but orbs make it a joke.

 

And like I said regarding orbs vs emps:  Besides, justifying keeping an op item unrestricted by claiming that another arguably op item will take it's place is pretty silly, don't you think?  If these are the only two items being discussed here, doesn't that indicate some kind of problem?

If you were similarly motivated, you could come up with as many tactical depth arguments for orbs as you could for EMPs.  As I indicated in the beginning of this thread,

Remember that although you (or your team) may not enjoy certain mechanics, you cannot speak for the league at large, and you may not have its best interests in mind.

 

As for only two items being discussed, you're forgetting that Hawken has like, 4 items.

 

We're not removing orbs completely.  We're not removing EMPs completely.  We're not removing items completely.

[ThirdEyE]

Tactical depth arguments for orbs and emps?  Let's hear them    I'm not a fan of either item and so far the defense for orbs has been very weak or nonexistent.

 

Hawken has many items that simply don't see much comp use due to these two being blatantly stronger than pretty much everything else.  Why not remove them entirely in the same way scanner was removed?  Please consider those words of yours as well.

[Nept]

Implementing restrictions typically stymies that very strategery and tacticoolery.  Further limiting mech classes, for example, would see most teams running very similar compositions while punishing those with more flexibility.  Of course, some mechanics limit strategic options while slowing gameplay to a crawl (see: Scanner) and, in our opinion, are best removed.  Finally, remember that restrictions can cause logistical issues.  Namely, the more restrictions we run, the more infractions and complaints we're likely to encounter.

[ThirdEyE]

Of course, some mechanics limit strategic options while slowing gameplay to a crawl (see: Scanner) and, in our opinion, are best removed.

 

This feels like one of those times when both people think they are right for precisely the same reason even though they disagree.  Wasn't that from hitch-hiker's guide or something?

 

Still waiting to hear how orbs promote tacticoolery...

 

Edit: 

�For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much�the wheel, New York, wars and so on�whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man�for precisely the same reasons.

 

? Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Edited by ThirdEyE, 07 June 2015 - 03:25 PM.

[IareDave]

Tactical depth arguments for orbs and emps?  Let's hear them    I'm not a fan of either item and so far the defense for orbs has been very weak or nonexistent.

 

Hawken has many items that simply don't see much comp use due to these two being blatantly stronger than pretty much everything else.  Why not remove them entirely in the same way scanner was removed?  Please consider those words of yours as well.

Orbs are OP when a player devotes half or more of their internal setup to improving orbs - they are not OP when internals that enhance it's viability are restricted (as mentioned earlier in the thread). 

 

I don't think anyone here is going to deny that orblording is blatantly OP, but it is to our best interest to find a way of enhancing the gameplay/balance without completely removing an item that is core to the gameplay and offers teams a defensive chance against invading dets(possibility of people running it with ext removed) and EMP spam. 

[ThirdEyE]

Orbs are OP when a player devotes half or more of their internal setup to improving orbs - they are not OP when internals that enhance it's viability are restricted (as mentioned earlier in the thread). 

 

I don't think anyone here is going to deny that orblording is blatantly OP, but it is to our best interest to find a way of enhancing the gameplay/balance without completely removing an item that is core to the gameplay and offers teams a defensive chance against invading dets(possibility of people running it with ext removed) and EMP spam. 

Where is the line drawn?  Are they only OP with extractor + adv rep kit, or as little as just rep kit?  Has there been any testing as to how much of a difference each tier of internal combinations makes in a comp team setting?

 

What makes me sad is how right you are in that orbs are core to gameplay, and that is why I'm so against the item, whereas others seem to just accept reliance on that playstyle.  There are plenty of other items that can be used to counter EMP but nobody uses them because orbs are all around easier, more reliable, and stronger.  And still it comes down to using EMP to demonstrate why orbs should stay...

[IareDave]

Where is the line drawn?  Are they only OP with extractor + adv rep kit, or as little as just rep kit?  Has there been any testing as to how much of a difference each tier of internal combinations makes in a comp team setting?

 

What makes me sad is how right you are in that orbs are core to gameplay, and that is why I'm so against the item, whereas others seem to just accept reliance on that playstyle.  There are plenty of other items that can be used to counter EMP but nobody uses them because orbs are all around easier, more reliable, and stronger.  And still it comes down to using EMP to demonstrate why orbs should stay...

I mean, when an item that you could run on your mech is literally dropped on mech death - then yeah, I think orbs were made to be a core part of the gameplay and used to strengthen risk/reward aggression or used in a defensive manner.

 

I've ran orblord without any internals (my heat scout only uses ext 1) and it's definitely nerfed to the point where the orbs are only useful to C repair quicker or used when you're not being focused down by an entire team.

[Nept]

Tactical depth arguments for orbs and emps?  Let's hear them 

 

Alright, honestly, I'm quite busy today.  I ignored your earlier requests because both the arguments and your entrenched position against the items seemed quite obvious.  However, I recognize that the tacticoolery may not be self-evident, so I've taken ten minutes to write an incomplete list.

 

Tactical Depth: Orbs

• Coordinated orb drops provide an alternative to withdrawal against superior numbers. Teams can drop multiple orbs on their defensive heavies, for example.

• Coordinated orb drops can also be used to bait enemies into attacking.

• Coordinated orb drops on healing teammates quickens their return to the front lines.

• Orbs, like shields, can be thrown to aid allies who would otherwise be unreachable.

• Orbs can be used to reduce the effectiveness of EMPs. If you're unable to avoid an EMP, drop an orb preemptively to help soak the damage. Orbs (like all items) are also affected by EMPs for a shorter duration than your weapons.

• Preemptively drop orbs around a defensive point to improve your odds of holding. Conversely, tossing orbs toward a point you're attacking (say, against a wall where you'll be taking cover) strengthens pushes.

• Teams fighting prolonged battles must consider their positioning relative to downed enemies and the orbs that they drop.

Tactical Depth: EMPs

• Enables a single stealth flanker (e.g., Infiltrator or Predator) to disable groups of enemies; conversely, groups of enemies must guard against such circumstances.

• Renders aggressive Raider rushes more viable; conversely, groups of enemies must guard against such circumstances.

• Discourages teams from grouping together too closely � makes relative positioning a consideration.

• Gives a disadvantage to teams running heavy compositions (much easier to strike than teams running lighter compositions). Also impacts map selection as a result: Heavy-comp teams may decide against the close-quarters maps that they'd typically prefer.

• Heavily impacts Incinerators and their Tech synergy: In addition to the EMP downtime, Incinerators must regenerate their heat pool.

• Interrupts Tech green-beam pushes. Provides teams an alternative to withdrawal or assassinating the Tech � especially useful for teams that don't run Sharpshooters.

• Can counter shields and punish overly-passive teams; conversely, shields can be used to bait EMPs.

• Similarly, can counter entrenched enemy positions.

• Can be used defensively to delay an enemy team's coordinated rush (players will scatter).

Both items can also be used to control an opponent's movement and/or their offensive/defensive mindset. Dropping an orb, for example, can cause an enemy to abandon a fight they would otherwise continue.  Don't particularly love this tactic's presence myself, but it does fall under the realm of tacticoolery. And launching an EMP directly manipulates an opponent's movement by forcing them to dodge (sometimes in a particular direction).

 

Now whether you enjoy these tactical considerations is up for debate. What isn't is that they are there

Edited by Nept, 07 June 2015 - 04:14 PM.

[ThirdEyE]

I mean, when an item that you could run on your mech is literally dropped on mech death - then yeah, I think orbs were made to be a core part of the gameplay and used to strengthen risk/reward aggression or used in a defensive manner.

 

I've ran orblord without any internals (my heat scout only uses ext 1) and it's definitely nerfed to the point where the orbs are only useful to C repair quicker or used when you're not being focused down by an entire team.

Death orbs are slightly different for a couple reasons.  They provide significantly less armor (120 compared to 170) and are only dropped on mech death which is typically not a time or place of your choosing.  The repair charge item was originally on a timer so you would be restricted to only one per minute or longer (forget what cooldown was), and provided a much lower percentage of health on average.  The change to lower health in combination with item charges was a poor design/balance oversight if anything.

 

I know you're exaggerating about having to be focused by an entire team to die while on orbs without internals, but I would really like to see just how neutered its effectiveness is in an organized team setting without internals.

[ThirdEyE]

I appreciate the effort Nept, and do agree with much of the EMP tactics listed.  However I find it hard to associate "drop item for more health" with tactics.  I suppose it is in the most base sense but it's about as deep as a puddle, which can be seen by most of your list being rehashes of the same "tactic".  Use orbs, and use them as much as possible.

[comic_sans]

Death orbs are slightly different for a couple reasons.  They provide significantly less armor (120 compared to 170)

 

Whoa, what?  How did I not know this til now.

[Nept]

I appreciate the effort Nept, and do agree with much of the EMP tactics listed.  However I find it hard to associate "drop item for more health" with tactics.  I suppose it is in the most base sense but it's about as deep as a puddle, which can be seen by most of your list being rehashes of the same "tactic".  Use orbs, and use them as much as possible.

 

Yeah, I don't mean to be a fuzzy bunny - just a lot on my plate atm.  The tactics center around dropped health, yes, but also where you drop that health and how you coordinate those drops with your teammates.  Dropping orbs mindlessly can hurt your team's chances if everyone's out during a defensive effort, for example.

 

Orbs are certainly the "more health item," just as EMPs are the "shutdown enemy weapons item," Detonators the "damage item," and weapons are the things that do damage. 

Edited by Nept, 07 June 2015 - 04:40 PM.

[ThirdEyE]

True, but at least weapons, dets, and emps require some semblance of skill in aiming.  I guess throwing orbs past a certain range does as well, but that's not a typical case and even then you're usually aiming for a stationary area.  Even shields and blockades are more interesting and skill-intensive as you can do some pretty effective and creative things with them.