539 replies to this topic

[Panzermanathod]

I guess Panzer what we're trying to say is that we don't think that the boost delay is that tactical of a decision.

 

(((I'm not saying that either.))

 

Essentially we'll decide that were going to walk and not boost, or maybe we'll just dodge in (AC or not), unfortunately those choices are really predictable.

 

(((To be honest, no delay is no less predictable than delay. It is not like a new mechanic is introduced, the only difference is knowing whether or not the delay is there.)))

 

The situation becomes a stall and the fight is stale especially at the corner game, whom will make the first mistake? Why should I make the first mistake? I can just sit back here on my orbs and let you break the corner, "No, you break the corner!"

 

(((Maybe, I don't know... isn't dodging around a corner a bit more productive than boosting, delay or otherwise? Either you face the enemy or you have to turn while boosting.)))

 

I understand your point of view but I think there is room for deeper decision making than that.

(((The delay thing I mentioned is not wholly my point of view, but me guessing at an attempt to explain why people think that delay = more tactical. One of my major reasonings for keeping the delay isn't "tactics". It's the fact that the boost's mechanics are fine as is as a means to go from point A to point B faster, and that isn't not optimal for use in attacking.)))

 

 

 

 

 

Slow gameplay =/= tactical

 

Was this a joke response?

Edited by Panzermanathod, 30 April 2015 - 11:00 PM.

[Nept]

Objectively, having the delay is less tactical because it allows for less tactics. Without the delay, you can use all the same tactics that you would with it, but you can also use additional tactics.

 

He sees it as impossible for having the delay be more tactical because it is literally not possible for it to be so.

 

Yes.  [My forum contributions have been amazing as of late]

[LEmental]

 

Honestly, I�m not angry with your response, so don�t take this personally: you�re young; you have a lot to learn.  But don�t, for a single second, think that you�re better than anyone else simply because you continued to play as the developers walked out.

 

LOLOLOLOL

[Xacius]

LOLOLOLOL

eh?

[CrimsonKaim]

@Xacius: I didn't read this 13 page long thread but can you tell me one realistic way how you could make your weapons poiting forward instantly after boosting where they are pointing backwards?

[?FTD? eXeon]

Some like you see the boost as almost purely a means of aiding offense, except the boost isn't good with said offense because of the delay (although calling the boost "useless" in combat sounds pretty strong). Ergo, everyone who wants it gone wishes so as to aid in the offensive game.

 

Some like me see it as another mobility option. Get you here. Get you there. Get you away. Get yourself shot in the back. It's not heavily used an offensive maneuver, and people like me don't treat it heavily as such. That is why some, like me, do not mind the delay.

 

When people say it's more tactical, you see it as impossible because you see the boost as means to an offense, not a means of movement.

I see boosting as almost purely a means of defense, I think that because of the delay it makes returning fire while trying to not die as an A who enjoy's playing agressively nearly impossible to win against any competent players let alone the best in the game.

 

You see it as a only mobility to travel from point a to b for the same reason you struggled to comprehend how boosting was beneficial in combat. It is not a heavily used offensively because there are so few players willing to be offensive, they are punished too heavily for being offensive that it is almost never the right move. 

 

I don't see it as impossible, I see it as a complete lie because because of the definition of tactical. Removal of the delay would be more tactical and there is absolutely no way you can dispute that.

 

 

Potential for being seen on radar. Fuel usage. A half second raise delay that would make ambushes slightly harder to counter (let's say the ambush is by a single mech). The fact that you cannot shoot while boosting.

 

As one approaches an enemy, all this must be considered. Once you get to an enemy, though, that's where dodging, jumping, aiming, and heat management come into play. Among other things.

 

With the delay gone, there is less to consider with boosting. Radar and Fuel are the same. Ambushes are slightly less of a detriment because you can simply start shooting. The opponent has less of an advantage for getting the drop on you. And so, it goes from "if I get ambushed I'll be slightly vulnerable and I can only hope to counter them or run away" to "If I see an enemy I will shoot."

 

The shooting while boosting is still there, but with no delay you no longer heavily consider the pros and cons of stopping a boost to shoot.

 

And with less detriments you potentially have more reason to boost in more situations (not all, and not necessarily a major increase). And if you boost in more situations, you are actively not considering other means of getting to where you are going, and as such this can be seen as fewer tactics because, since the boost is "better" and more "favorable" you can afford to do that more, and other methods less.

 

But this is just a guess.

Without the delay you don't consider anything negative about boosting less, you just have the ability to react to fire .5 seconds faster than you did before.  And just because you can boost without delay doesn't mean you are not actively considering other means travel, without the delay just means you have more options, of course you'll choose the one you think is best but your choice of tactics for movement have increased. It's not like anyone dodges or hovers around for travel ever as it is now and everyone walks right now because of the radar not because of the boost delay.

[AsianJoyKiller]

@Xacius: I didn't read this 13 page long thread but can you tell me one realistic way how you could make your weapons poiting forward instantly after boosting where they are pointing backwards?

How often do you question jumping or grenade throwing animations in games?

[?FTD? eXeon]

@Xacius: I didn't read this 13 page long thread but can you tell me one realistic way how you could make your weapons poiting forward instantly after boosting where they are pointing backwards?

How about the fact that even though there was a bug for well over a year(http://hawken.mirror...te-patch-notes/

• Players can no longer instantly fire when jumping after a boost.

 no one noticed it in the 10s of thousands of hours players played against people using this without it getting reported 

[CrimsonKaim]

 

 no one noticed it in the 10s of thousands of hours players played against people using this without it getting reported 

 

I noticed it and I was complainign about it (with success). IT was so damn annoying to see people beign good using an exploit. The true skilled people remaiend good, the bunny-hopper-scouts failed. 

 

How about this: An internal which allows you to ready up your weapons. You can still boost for the time your weapons are getting ready but when they are ready, you can't boost for 1 second.

That means, upon pressing some button, your weapons are getting ready and when they are ready you can shoot instantly but you are unable to boost for one second.

[LEmental]

eh?

You are young too.

[Xacius]

You are young too.

And?  Educated, relatively mature (barring sarcasm and foolhardy posts), and probably smarter than the majority of the people on these boards.   Young doesn't necessarily equate to a lack of experience.  

Edited by Xacius, 01 May 2015 - 12:52 AM.

[Xacius]

@Xacius: I didn't read this 13 page long thread but can you tell me one realistic way how you could make your weapons poiting forward instantly after boosting where they are pointing backwards?

Realistic?  

 

Nothing about this game is realistic, lol.  Nonetheless, a locking mechanism where the arms immediately snap up could be used.  They simply snap into place when the user needs to fire.  Even if that didn't exist, I wouldn't see a problem with it.  

 

Take the dodge, for example.  Go into the explore maps and press tab.  Dodge, and fire while you're in the middle of the dodge.  Despite your TOW pointing downward, the rocket fires straight.  

[?FTD? eXeon]

I noticed it and I was complainign about it (with success). IT was so damn annoying to see people beign good using an exploit. The true skilled people remaiend good, the bunny-hopper-scouts failed. 

 

How about this: An internal which allows you to ready up your weapons. You can still boost for the time your weapons are getting ready but when they are ready, you can't boost for 1 second.

That means, upon pressing some button, your weapons are getting ready and when they are ready you can shoot instantly but you are unable to boost for one second.

You were complaining about it yet it remained for over a year. Where exactly were these complaints cause I didn't even know it was a thing till just before it was fixed, was just something I had habitually come to do after playing for so long.

 

That internal sounds like an absolutely horrid trade off, the problem is the fact you have to walk/hover for .5 seconds before you can return fire after boosting which makes you a wide open target.

[CrimsonKaim]

That internal sounds like an absolutely horrid trade off, the problem is the fact you have to walk/hover for .5 seconds before you can return fire after boosting which makes you a wide open target.

 

Oh yes, remember when internals had a tradeoff. These were actually cool and I liked that. Straight buffs are always boring.

But yes, guess what, you have a weak point in combat. Just like in real life. The challenge is to get along with it or to outmanouver so that the enemy can't hit you in these .5 seconds. 

 

Still, in these .5 seconds, you can still dodge. So you are not that still target everyone is trying to tell me.

[LEmental]

And?  Educated, relatively mature (barring sarcasm and foolhardy posts), and probably smarter than the majority of the people on these boards.   Young doesn't necessarily equate to a lack of experience.  

I only pointed out that you used a trait against Merl (negatively) that you yourself shared.  Age is objective, while wisdom and knowledge are nearly impossible to gauge.

 

At any rate, this has no bearing on the topic.   

Edited by LEmental, 01 May 2015 - 04:27 AM.

[DeviousDave]

First time post, Long time Lurker

 

Instead of removing the delay, why not make the bypass a game mechanic?

 

Simply make it so that hitting the fire button after leaving boost raises your weapons instantly and fires a shot off HOWEVER you get a bunch of heat dumped into your heat bars on top of the heat generated by your first shot.

 

Don't press the fire button and your guns raise normally with no heat generation.

 

You could even take it one step further and have a 'sweet spot' where hitting the fire button raises your guns and DOESN'T cause additional heat to be generated (or even gives you a heat free shot as well)

 

Gives you more options on the battlefield and doesn't require the complete removal of an interesting feature of the game.

[Nept]

bearing*

[M4st0d0n]

Damn Adhesive. They stole our brightest youngs for forced labor, QA tessting a game they didnt released. Who's gonna invent cold fusion now.

[Superkamikazee]

Pretentious the Thread.

 

Quoted for posterity. 

[Panzermanathod]

 

 

You see it as a only mobility to travel from point a to b for the same reason you struggled to comprehend how boosting was beneficial in combat. It is not a heavily used offensively because there are so few players willing to be offensive, they are punished too heavily for being offensive that it is almost never the right move.

 

(((Part of it was because I couldn't quite see how boosting could be used in battle when you can only initiate a boost moving forward. )))

 

I don't see it as impossible,

 

(((Actually that was referring to what AJK said. I should have specified.)))

 

I see it as a complete lie because because of the definition of tactical.

 

(((Tactics imply a means to an end in the battlefield, based on your supplied definition. If you want to talk semantics, the tactics involving the delay aren't so much less than without, just that the tactics of the delay are elsewhere. It's the difference between being able to fire after boosting, and knowing that your opponent is at a slight disadvantage once they boost.

 

Cripes I didn't even want to go tactical in this.)))

 

Removal of the delay would be more tactical and there is absolutely no way you can dispute that.

 

(((Oh ho ho, yes I can dispute it.

 

But when I brought up tactics it was a means to try to understand why people equate a delay to more tactical, not literally me saying the delay should remain because it was more tactical. )))

 

Without the delay you don't consider anything negative about boosting less,

 

(((I'm not saying without the delay boosting becomes perfect. Just objectively more favorable.)))

 

you just have the ability to react to fire .5 seconds faster than you did before.  And just because you can boost without delay doesn't mean you are not actively considering other means travel, without the delay just means you have more options, of course you'll choose the one you think is best but your choice of tactics for movement have increased.

 

(((It hasn't. It just means there are different tactics for movement.)))

 

It's not like anyone dodges or hovers around for travel ever as it is now and everyone walks right now because of the radar not because of the boost delay.

 

(((And I was saying that I think when people say having the delay is more tactical (not me), they say so in respect to how to approach a situation and how to respond to a situation, whereas you say no delay is more tactical in respect to actual fighting.)))

[?FTD? eXeon]

 

 

 the tactics involving the delay aren't so much less than without, just that the tactics of the delay are elsewhere. 

All your arguments are destroyed with this one little quote made by yourself, the fact that tactics available are not so much less still means there are less tactics available with the delay, pretty simple to understand this when even you yourself admit to it. There is no extra tactic you gain because of the delay, just one tactic is extremely limited as opposed to without. And without the tactic it opens up your ability to more often use one of the few tactics available. 

 

A delay does not slow down the game in any way other than punishing players for using boosting so they dont and a delay does not in anyway add any more tactics to hawken, it just makes you less likely to boost in combat because of its significant impact on your DPS. If anything a delay is directly hindering your tactical choices.

Edited by (DuckTheFelay) Exeon, 01 May 2015 - 06:19 AM.

[Panzermanathod]

All the relevant "arguments" that are "destroyed" by that line was, as I said a couple times already, me guessing as to why people may say having a delay is more tactical. I might have used some of my own reasoning but I, Panzermanathod, am not stating that the delay is more or less tactical.

 

There's a difference between "this is why I think this" and "this may be why they think this". Earlier in the thread even I mentioned that the lack of delay would open some attack/approach options, more than the exploit could do, and you said there weren't any additional options. Now you're saying *that* line destroys my arguments saying delay is more tactical despite me saying me saying this isn't fully my thoughts on the issue, moreso me trying to see why some people think no delay is more "tactical"?

 

Seriously if what I said about delay/no-delay tactics were what I really thought about it, I've had destroyed my own argument before that line.

Edited by Panzermanathod, 01 May 2015 - 06:35 AM.

[Superkamikazee]

I feel there may be some confusion on both sides of the argument when it comes to distinguishing between "tactics", and "reaction time / reflexes".

[Siphersh]

Exactly how does delay make the game more tactical(Definition here for ya since you obviously seem to not understand what it means)? By the very definition, I may be crazy here but, the delay is completely anti-tactical.

 

'The  players gained a tactical advantage by being able to utilize dodge in combat' vs 'The players gained a tactical advantage by having their boost become unusuable in combat' which of those sounds more accurate?

 

As the definition you're referring to explains, tactics is about planning. And, as Panzermanathod points out: "With the delay gone, there is less to consider with boosting."

 

That consideration, that planning is what I mean when I say that the delay makes the game more tactical. And that's what I like about it.

[Panzermanathod]

I've said before I personally don't want to involve "tactics" in my reasons for lack of delay. Which is why I never really mentioned it. Whether or not no delay is more tactical isn't an issue I am concerned about. I merely tried to explain, the best I could understand, why other people thought no delay was more tactical. It is a line of reasoning I've otherwise left alone, and based on this...

 

 

As the definition you're referring to explains, tactics is about planning. And, as Panzermanathod points out: "With the delay gone, there is less to consider with boosting."

 

That consideration, that planning is what I mean when I say that the delay makes the game more tactical. And that's what I like about it.

 

...my hypothesis seems to hold some water at least.

Edited by Panzermanathod, 01 May 2015 - 06:43 AM.

[?FTD? eXeon]

As the definition you're referring to explains, tactics is about planning. And, as Panzermanathod points out: "With the delay gone, there is less to consider with boosting."

 

That consideration, that planning is what I mean when I say that the delay makes the game more tactical. And that's what I like about it.

The delay does not make you plan anything, it just makes you NOT boost. It does not make it more tactical it makes you use less tactics, there is literally nothing to a firefight right now, you strafe left and right using dodges.

[?FTD? eXeon]

I've said before I personally don't want to involve "tactics" in my reasons for lack of delay. Which is why I never really mentioned it. Whether or not no delay is more tactical isn't an issue I am concerned about. I merely tried to explain, the best I could understand, why other people thought no delay was more tactical. It is a line of reasoning I've otherwise left alone, and based on this...

 

 

 

...my hypothesis seems to hold some water at least.

Other people who think a delay after boosting is 'more tactical' are ignoring the clear fact that it limits your options and does not add anything, your hypothesis does not hold water with anyone who has average logical reasoning.

Edited by (DuckTheFelay) Exeon, 01 May 2015 - 10:02 AM.

[PoopSlinger]

If you don't want the delay, just play Raider.  Or G2Raider.    They have powerful abilities that let you FSU  with no weapon delay while boosting.  Stop being sustain peasants.

Edited by PoopSlinger, 01 May 2015 - 07:27 AM.

[?FTD? eXeon]

If you don't want the delay, just play Raider.  Or G2Raider.    They have powerful abilities that let you FSU  with no weapon delay while boosting.  Stop being sustain peasants.

And what about those of us who enjoy using burst weaponry that aren't on raider? Suck it?

[Panzermanathod]

The delay does not make you plan anything, it just makes you NOT boost. It does not make it more tactical it makes you use less tactics, there is literally nothing to a firefight right now, you strafe left and right using dodges.

 

 It's not like anyone dodges or hovers around for travel ever as it is now and everyone walks right now because of the radar not because of the boost delay.

 

If that second quote is taken out of context I apologize. But as is this looks like a contradiction. Also, literally nothing to a firefight? Again, hyperbole does not help you in this case. No delay makes boosting in a firefight more practical. It doesn't *enable* boosting in a firefight.

 

 

Other people who think a delay after boosting is 'more tactical' are idiots, your hypothesis does not hold water with anyone who has average logical reasoning.

 

Hyperbole and now personal attacks.

[Fstroke]

And? Educated, relatively mature (barring sarcasm and foolhardy posts), and probably smarter than the majority of the people on these boards. Young doesn't necessarily equate to a lack of experience.

Wow

[?FTD? eXeon]

If that second quote is taken out of context I apologize. But as is this looks like a contradiction. Also, literally nothing to a firefight? Again, hyperbole does not help you in this case. No delay makes boosting in a firefight more practical. It doesn't *enable* boosting in a firefight.

 

 

 

Hyperbole and now personal attacks.

The second quote was referring to traveling as I was trying to reply to your comments about people thinking about other options for traveling and my first was referring to utilizing it in combat. I am not exaggerating I am simplifying what all firefights come down to, obviously you could be strafing behind or out of cover but you are still just strafing/dodging back and forth. You are correct that the removal of the delay doesn't add boosting to the game but, what makes it 'more tactical' is the fact that you are actually doing something beneficial with it as opposed to currently shooting yourself in the foot as it is right now in combat.

 

I'll admit(and change) the wording I chose was a little harsh. When people cannot comprehend how a very simple and clear definition applies to this situation it really hurts my head and I made a very hasty comment. There are very clearly less options when the boost delay is in place and very clearly more options when it is removed. I understand this is not your point but you are arguing and trying to defend others who are obviously wrong in their comment they likely made with little thought.

Edited by (DuckTheFelay) Exeon, 01 May 2015 - 10:04 AM.

[TheButtSatisfier]

Wow

 

Soon we will have our IQ scores, level of education, 401k figures, age, MMR, K/D, and time spent in-game all prominently listed below our avatars so that everyone may know the weight of our opinion when we debate game mechanics. Hyperlinks to personal references and LinkedIn pages will be optional.

 

I'd say penis size too, but listing the dimensions of mine would break the borders of this forum.

[AsianJoyKiller]

As the definition you're referring to explains, tactics is about planning. And, as Panzermanathod points out: "With the delay gone, there is less to consider with boosting."
 
That consideration, that planning is what I mean when I say that the delay makes the game more tactical. And that's what I like about it.

That doesn't make it more tactical.
That means you're just not fast enough at planning.

[Xacius]

Wow

Forgot to include "better looking"

[Panzermanathod]

I am not exaggerating I am simplifying what all firefights come down to, obviously you could be strafing behind or out of cover but you are still just strafing/dodging back and forth.

 

Using "literally" is not "simplifying". "Literally" implies either a lack of ambiguity in a statement or as an exaggeration. You can say what one can do offers little option (which is in your right to do so), although I personally believe the number of options remain the same, one simply becomes more viable for high level play.

[TheButtSatisfier]

Forgot to include "better looking"

 

This is the most important characteristic. Beauty and MMR are directly proportional.

[?FTD? eXeon]

Using "literally" is not "simplifying". "Literally" implies either a lack of ambiguity in a statement or as an exaggeration. You can say what one can do offers little option (which is in your right to do so), although I personally believe the number of options remain the same, one simply becomes more viable for high level play.

It is only an increase in viable options but when something isn't viable it really isn't an option so I see it as a straight increase in options. I use literally far too much, it's just something I have a bad habit of. I guess it was an exaggerated simplification, to me and obviously many other players it is extremely boring because there is such little skill used in these bland DPS races. 

[?FTD? eXeon]

Alright. We can chalk this off as difference of opinion (in terms of whether or not currently boosting in a fire fight is an option). That's fine by me.

Fair nuff

[Xacius]

I only pointed out that you used a trait against Merl (negatively) that you yourself shared.  Age is objective, while wisdom and knowledge are nearly impossible to gauge.

 

At any rate, this has no bearing on the topic.   

 That's just outright wrong.  If wisdom and knowledge were impossible to gauge, then there wouldn't be noticeable intelligence differentials in society.  And how is knowledge, or the retention thereof, "nearly impossible to gauge?"  lmfao.  

 

I meant my initial statement as "you're young, and you have a lot to learn. "

 

You interpreted it as "you're young, so you have a lot to learn. "

 

Additionally, that statement was not meant as a negative connotation.  Again, you misinterpreted the semantics.