248 replies to this topic

[MomOw]

NO. You ever played a coop game?

 

 

[Anichkov3]

You are planning to open in 2016 game servers in the new countries (for example Russia or China)? When you restart the game localization into other languages (or the game will be available in English only) will be made?

[Superkamikazee]

It more or less sounds like pc is being abandoned. Devs are suggesting they want to leave Hawken the same on pc, but make changes for console is a clear indication where development is being focused. It's very odd there won't be platform parity in the same way most every other multiplatform game has had lol. RLD is a joke. I have an Xbox, so at least I will be able try the "new" version of Hawken and make a final decision if the game is truly dead and milked dry.

[BlackWarGreymon]

NO. You ever played a coop game?

 

Plenty. What justification do you have for objecting? On the low-level servers, the bots are terrible, no argument here, but on the occasions that I've gotten into high-level servers the bots are insane, like playing against six 2500-3000MMR players. 

 

If the AI could be coded so that it sticks near to the main group, and plays a support role and doesn't walk in front of players, that'd be handy. Alternatively, they could play an attacking role in a strong mech, one that others could support.

 

I'm just throwing ideas around- at present when you have uneven teams, the outcome is all but guaranteed- there needs to be better balance, or something.

 

 

 

14) Please implement a more robust training mode that doesn't just cover basic movement and firing skills. There needs to be training for how to play Siege and to a lesser extent Missile Assault more effectively; right now, 'tactics' seems to be a dirty word- as does common sense ( that applies to the high MMR players too, as noted already ).

Edited by BlackWarGreymon, 21 June 2016 - 06:07 PM.

[raging_squirrel]

thread not derailed, totally on topic because all the people in the discussion have short attenti o0o a squirrel

I resent that remark 

[claisolais]

Plenty. What justification do you have for objecting? On the low-level servers, the bots are terrible, no argument here, but on the occasions that I've gotten into high-level servers the bots are insane, like playing against six 2500-3000MMR players. 

 

If the AI could be coded so that it sticks near to the main group, and plays a support role and doesn't walk in front of players, that'd be handy. Alternatively, they could play an attacking role in a strong mech, one that others could support.

 

I'm just throwing ideas around- at present when you have uneven teams, the outcome is all but guaranteed- there needs to be better balance, or something

It's MUCH more than just stick to the team, they don't communicate with team.

Your suggestion sounds more like a drone internal.

 

Higher lvl bots does not have their mmr because they know tricks or having better situation awareness, they just reduced their intentionally designed mistakes, so yea...to some extent, 3000 bot is just an aimbot, they dont see radar and predict, they dont communicate, they donno know how to fight different bots and different enemy combinations and etc.

 

Lower level bots, for example, <mmr2100, are the most servers that having unbalance issues without anyone volunteer to sit out. Those bots are stupid, I imagine you know that. But you can just imagine and say whatever you want like, that they can code every imaginable situation and solutions for bots to consider, and at the same time allow them to play according to the SRD---------------------it's just unrealistic.

 

I imagine the reason why we're only having 4 coop TDM maps, is also about coding.   Also apply to bots's limited mech options.

 

I don't want to fight with brainless bots, let alone to lose a game because of a stupid brainless bot.

Edited by claisolais, 22 June 2016 - 12:08 PM.

[nepacaka]

Devs pls... i ask again.

Any changes in Items/internal system for PS4, Xbox and PC? or you leave it the same like we have now?

[DemitronPrime]

Devs pls... i ask again.

Any changes in Items/internal system for PS4, Xbox and PC? or you leave it the same like we have now?

Second this....

 

I need to KNOW all the changes now so i can plan and train ahead so when the update launches i can be the best O_O

[Darktim300]

So as far as I can tell, I can keep my Assault  Master-race Mech.

[ARCH3TYP3]

So as far as I can tell, I can keep my Assault  Master-race Mech.

Finally....the voice of reason.

[americanbrit14]

So as far as I can tell, I can keep my Assault  Master-race Mech.

yes, and hestoned can keep all of his horrific abominations he calls mechs, all of them

[BlackWarGreymon]

It's MUCH more than just stick to the team, they don't communicate with team.

Your suggestion sounds more like a drone internal.

 

Higher lvl bots does not have their mmr because they know tricks or having better situation awareness, they just reduced their intentionally designed mistakes, so yea...to some extent, 3000 bot is just an aimbot, they dont see radar and predict, they dont communicate, they donno know how to fight different bots and different enemy combinations and etc.

 

Lower level bots, for example, <mmr2100, are the most servers that having unbalance issues without anyone volunteer to sit out. Those bots are stupid, I imagine you know that. But you can just imagine and say whatever you want like, that they can code every imaginable situation and solutions for bots to consider, and at the same time allow them to play according to the SRD---------------------it's just unrealistic.

 

I imagine the reason why we're only having 4 coop TDM maps, is also about coding.   Also apply to bots's limited mech options.

 

I don't want to fight with brainless bots, let alone to lose a game because of a stupid brainless bot.

 

Like I said, throwing out ideas. A better idea then would be to force one player from the larger team to be a spectator only, until someone else joins. The obvious issue then is that if half of one team decides to rage quit, what happens then? I guess we are just resigned to our fate. :-/

 

 

I love the way you keep talking like you know despite being told like 5 times by players that know more that you dont know fuzzy bunny...

 

10 points for determination

 

Stop brown nosing- reported for bullying behaviour, again. Besides, 1 person disagreed with that idea, and only explained their view point after being asked to.

 

The argument over scanners and scramblers was not a one sided argument- there is no universal agreement over what to do about them, or make them better- everyone has different ideas. They aren't allowed in private server matches, and that's fine by me. You need to stop trying to impress the big boys by smack talking on the forums- harassment is not tolerated.

Edited by BlackWarGreymon, 22 June 2016 - 05:50 PM.

[claisolais]

Like I said, throwing out ideas. A better idea then would be to force one player from the larger team to be a spectator only, until someone else joins. The obvious issue then is that if half of one team decides to rage quit, what happens then? I guess we are just resigned to our fate. :-/

Remember rage quit is one of the most popular problem that online gaming has, it's still not yet been solved because it's hard to solve.
But you're right, we need ideas.
Although
Bots and force switch/sit are some of the worst ideas. Punish those who left is one thing we can do, and probably the only thing we can do.

[claisolais]

L...
Besides, 1 person disagreed with that idea, and only explained their view point after being asked to.

The reason regarding our discussion was rather OBVIOUS.
FPS AI? They kill like mmr 2000 yet die like mmr 1000, there you go: a mmr 1500 bot. You need justifications? My herokuapp page and yours.

You've played plenty of coop games yet learned almost nothing from it.

Also coding AI is OBVIOUSLY HARD, in case you haven't noticed.

[BlackWarGreymon]

Force switch is quite literally, the worst. Punishing rage quitters has been booted around for... ever? Making them sit out for 5 minutes ( unable to join a new match ) should help for sure. 

 

Also:

JUST.

 

THROWING.

 

IDEAS.

 

Stop stroking your ego too, it's unbecoming of an fps hero such as yourself.

 

 

The reason regarding our discussion was rather OBVIOUS.
FPS AI? They kill like mmr 2000 yet die like mmr 1000, there you go: a mmr 1500 bot. You need justifications? My herokuapp page and yours.

You've played plenty of coop games yet learned almost nothing from it.

Also coding AI is OBVIOUSLY HARD, in case you haven't noticed.[/quote]

 

 

Edited by BlackWarGreymon, 22 June 2016 - 06:40 PM.

[PsychedelicGrass]

I'm reporting all of you for bullying behavior.

[BlackWarGreymon]

Good one. Making insulting posts targeted at one specific person IS bullying though- lively debate between different people is not. I won't tolerate it, none of us should.

[claisolais]

Force switch is quite literally, the worst. Punishing rage quitters has been booted around for... ever? Making them sit out for 5 minutes ( unable to join a new match ) should help for sure.

Also:
JUST.

THROWING.

IDEAS.

Stop stroking your ego too, it's unbecoming of an fps hero such as yourself.

The only thing I'm proud of my herokuapp page is that I have a lot of mechs.
You've been talking like you know A LOT OF THINGS. "Justification" Really?
With all of the obvious reason there, I don't want to tolerant that single word.

Edited by claisolais, 22 June 2016 - 07:01 PM.

[StubbornPuppet]

How much of the scanner problem would be solved by making it appear on enemy radar?

[BlackWarGreymon]

How much of the scanner problem would be solved by making it appear on enemy radar?

Depends if you could get close enough to take it out, or have line-of-sight to snipe it with directions from someone closer. People will still say 'omg wallhacks' though, that's the issue.

 

A more effective Scrambler would be more advantageous in my opinion.

Edited by BlackWarGreymon, 23 June 2016 - 08:00 AM.

[TheButtSatisfier]

Numerous people have also stated how easy it would be to buff the Scrambler to make it much more effective against the Scanner; increase its range, actually scramble the red dots properly ( or render the radar inoperable within its area of effect ), and don't have a static red dot that gives away its location. Boom, now the Scrambler can totally negate the Scanner- how hard was that?

 

One of the cooler nuances of the current item loadout - with the exception of the scanner - is that none of the items are so universally effective that they require a hard counter. EMPs have no hard counter, barriers have no hard counter, turrets, detonators, heat orbs, repair orbs - none of them are so powerful that when someone sees them, they say "oh man that item is cray, I need to pick an item to counter it". The only minor exception would be choosing an EMP to pop shields, but that's a larger separate discussion of that specific mechanic.

 

You are proposing to address the scanner's abilities - which many of us consider to be overpowered - by giving the scanner a hard counter in the form of a scrambler. We're saying that the scanner should be reworked to be useful in fewer situations so that it doesn't need a hard counter, like how all other items are right now. In its current form, the scanner offers a greater advantage to the entire team for a longer period of time than any other item in the game, period. An EMP detonates and the effects last for less than 10 seconds, but it can also affect your allies. A repair orb is static and only heals for a relatively small amount, but an enemy can use it too. A barrier can stop an enemy rush, but it can also prevent your retreat. Those are great balanced nuances in those items, and they're balanced enough that it requires skill and awareness to effectively use them.

 

But a scanner? You set it down, it starts twirling, and all the sudden you know everyone's location within a large radius, and so does everyone else on your team in that vicinity. The only skills involved with setting it down are (1) putting it somewhere where it will reveal the most enemies, and (2) where it won't quickly get destroyed. That's it. It offers a very large advantage to potentially 6 allied players for a long period of time with no negative effects and almost the least amount of skill out of using any item in Hawken. I don't think that the proper way to address the balance of this item is to create an equally powerful item to counteract it. Instead, apply those same nuanced balance mechanics that I described earlier to the scanner. I don't know what the answer to that is, and literally hundreds of suggestions have been offered on the topic, so I'm not going to list them here.

 

Hopefully you'll read this as genuine and constructive criticism of an item rather than "just crying about an item". Theorycrafting is based on constructive and honest analysis, and that's how a lot of us have come to the conclusion that the scanner stands head and shoulders above all other items in terms of utility. Trying to balance one item by significantly altering another might very well work, but it adds a lot of additional complexities that could be avoided by addressing just a few root factors.

 

Did you know, we have Radar scanners in real life too- and effective ways to render them useless; is it too much of a stretch that you can't imagine such technology still existing in the future ( albeit in a computer game )? You don't see one country moaning at another to stop using radar or sonar when they are fighting each other- it's bewildering that you are so against such a game mechanic that has its foundation in real-world technology.

 

Yes, they're called an AGM-88 HARM, and we loiter million dollar aircraft with these and wait for the enemy to turn their ground-based radar on so we can lob HARMs at them. If you're saying that there should be a Hawken equivalent of a HARM that flies around and destroys an active radar system then my criticism of creating or boosting another item to act as a hard counter to the scanner still applies.

 

Also, while this should be obvious, but we're not playing Hawken as a milsim. We play it for fun. In real life there are weapon systems that are wildly better than other weapon systems. The only regulations regarding weapons of war are generally based around how they affect civilian populations. As a result, you can have fantastically unbalanced real-world military engagements. Take the first Gulf War. Coalition forces fuzzy bunnyng annihilated the Iraqi army, and I guarantee you nobody on the receiving end found it fun.

 

Point being, bringing in "hee hee fight fire with fire!" reflects the natural progression of conflict in the real world. But we're playing a game where we want to have a lot of fun, and that usually comes with skillful use of balanced items to produce an environment where your in-game achievements are based on how well you play versus how OP of an item loadout you can use.

Edited by TheButtSatisfier, 23 June 2016 - 08:46 AM.

[BlackWarGreymon]

One of the cooler nuances of the current item loadout - with the exception of the scanner - is that none of the items are so universally effective that they require a hard counter. EMPs have no hard counter, barriers have no hard counter, turrets, detonators, heat orbs, repair orbs - none of them are so powerful that when someone sees them, they say "oh man that item is cray, I need to pick an item to counter it". The only minor exception would be choosing an EMP to pop shields, but that's a larger separate discussion of that specific mechanic.

 

You are proposing to address the scanner's abilities - which many of us consider to be overpowered - by giving the scanner a hard counter in the form of a scrambler. We're saying that the scanner should be reworked to be useful in fewer situations so that it doesn't need a hard counter, like how all other items are right now. In its current form, the scanner offers a greater advantage to the entire team for a longer period of time than any other item in the game, period. An EMP detonates and the effects last for less than 10 seconds, but it can also affect your allies. A repair orb is static and only heals for a relatively small amount, but an enemy can use it too. A barrier can stop an enemy rush, but it can also prevent your retreat. Those are great balanced nuances in those items, and they're balanced enough that it requires skill and awareness to effectively use them.

 

But a scanner? You set it down, it starts twirling, and all the sudden you know everyone's location within a large radius, and so does everyone else on your team in that vicinity. The only skills involved with setting it down are (1) putting it somewhere where it will reveal the most enemies, and (2) where it won't quickly get destroyed. That's it. It offers a very large advantage to potentially 6 allied players for a long period of time with no negative effects and almost the least amount of skill out of using any item in Hawken. I don't think that the proper way to address the balance of this item is to create an equally powerful item to counteract it. Instead, apply those same nuanced balance mechanics that I described earlier to the scanner. I don't know what the answer to that is, and literally hundreds of suggestions have been offered on the topic, so I'm not going to list them here.

 

Hopefully you'll read this as genuine and constructive criticism of an item rather than "just crying about an item". Theorycrafting is based on constructive and honest analysis, and that's how a lot of us have come to the conclusion that the scanner isn't in the right place for being an item. Trying to balance one item by significantly altering another might very well work, but it adds a lot of additional complexities that could be avoided by addressing just a few root factors.

 

 

Yes, they're called an AGM-88 HARM, and we loiter million dollar aircraft with these and wait for the enemy to turn one on so we can shoot the fuzzy bunny out of them with them. If you're saying that there should be an item that flies around and destroys an active radar system in Hawken then my criticism of creating or boosting another item to act as a hard counter to the scanner still applies.

 

 

It's all academic though- the devs haven't said that they are changing the scanner or scrambler, so we just have to deal with it. If anyone has any serious, concrete suggestions for how to 'fix' the scanner, I'm sure the devs would love to hear it.

 

I'd suggest a shorter range/area of effect, and no ability to penetrate walls. if the scanner was placed up high, then it would have a larger range and be able to see over low walls ( same height or lower than the scanner is positioned ).

 

How's that for a start?

[TheButtSatisfier]

 

 

It's all academic though- the devs haven't said that they are changing the scanner or scrambler, so we just have to deal with it. If anyone has any serious, concrete suggestions for how to 'fix' the scanner, I'm sure the devs would love to hear it.

 

I'd suggest a shorter range/area of effect, and no ability to penetrate walls. if the scanner was placed up high, then it would have a larger range and be able to see over low walls ( same height or lower than the scanner is positioned ).

 

How's that for a start?

 

I think it would be pretty difficult for the devs to code a line-of-sight scanner, but if it worked then I think that'd be a neat mechanic. That's exactly what I mean by balancing the scanner too - decrease the existing very high utility of a scanner by giving it some limitations.

 

Honestly I'd settle for something as basic as shortening the time that a scanner stays alive and reducing the radius considerably. Like, only use it when you know a push is coming, and it's only active for 5 seconds. That way, what's actually limiting you to using the scanner is your own item cooldown. Do you want to toss that scanner down, knowing it will only be active for a very short period of time, at the risk of not being able to use your repair orb or EMP when the enemy comes charging in because your cooldown is still active?

[BlackWarGreymon]

There we go, good, thought out ideas.

 

What about the scanner being more like an actual radar- it doesn't relay enemy positions constantly, it only updates every few seconds? That would limit its usefulness, and timing of an attack would have to be perfectly coordinated.

 

Or, how about the scanner is airborne- it launches up in the air and has still has a decent area of affect, but can be easily shot down. 

 

I like the idea of it having a shorter duration though- forcing people to use tactics and coordinate their attacks would improve the standard of gameplay for sure- it would indeed become less of a crutch for people who don't survey their surroundings, and would become a powerful tool instead, one which has to be used carefully.

[crockrocket]

A sweeping radar or pulse such that any positions are only visible once every x seconds might be a viable nerf as well, though in all honesty I'd be in favor of just removing the thing from the game.

[Hyginos]

For context, scanner changes have also been discussed at length in the past (here, here, here, and  here).

[Hecatoncheires]

Remember rage quit is one of the most popular problem that online gaming has, it's still not yet been solved because it's hard to solve.
But you're right, we need ideas.
Although
Bots and force switch/sit are some of the worst ideas. Punish those who left is one thing we can do, and probably the only thing we can do.

I actually think adding a spectator function would alleviate the quitting problem. The main reason quitters are followed by a prolonged deficit is because there aren't a line of players to take over. Adding a spectating feature would generate that line as well as allow for new players to learn from the best.

[americanbrit14]

ya know, considering the current topic seems to be proving BWG wrong, how 'bout we just take a nice long shift and turn it into a conversation about mexican food, then start calling people out so the thread can get locked and we can casually end all of this.

[Hecatoncheires]

ya know, considering the current topic seems to be proving BWG wrong, how 'bout we just take a nice long shift and turn it into a conversation about mexican food, then start calling people out so the thread can get locked and we can casually end all of this.

It would be better to just continue on with the topic while ignoring them so it's easier for the moderators to remove off topic posts and members without harming valuable input.

[Nept]

For context, scanner changes have also been discussed at length in the past (here, here, here, and  here).

 

This.  The developers should read these threads and their corresponding links.  This is all ground that has been thoroughly covered for years.  The best suggestions, imo, involve drastic range reduction, sound generation, turning the Scanner into a radar pulse, and killing anyone who equips it.

Edited by Mech Mod 4, 26 June 2016 - 03:56 PM.

[Epsilon_Knight]

Scanner is a plague on the game, and desperately needs a rework or removal.  The idea of using scrambler, even buffed scrambler, doesn't hold much stock.  Most people only use two items.  Scanner can benefit you against all players within range.  Scrambler only benefits you against all player in range without line of sight on the fake radar ghosts.  Given most intelligent players can work around the scrambler's output, it doesn't even serve as a hard counter to scanner -- but even if it did, who wants to give up a useful item slot to carry a countermeasure to someone else's actually-useful-item?  

 

If scrambler were going to become equally lame-tier, it should completely disable enemy radar within range.

[DallasCreeper]

Scanner is a plague on the game, and desperately needs a rework or removal.  The idea of using scrambler, even buffed scrambler, doesn't hold much stock.  Most people only use two items.  Scanner can benefit you against all players within range.  Scrambler only benefits you against all player in range without line of sight on the fake radar ghosts.  Given most intelligent players can work around the scrambler's output, it doesn't even serve as a hard counter to scanner -- but even if it did, who wants to give up a useful item slot to carry a countermeasure to someone else's actually-useful-item?  

 

If scrambler were going to become equally lame-tier, it should completely disable enemy radar within range.

I think it would be interesting if Scrambler added a haze to a player's radar, similar to the ISM. 

[Hecatoncheires]

Request for the Devs: Can you limit the number of times each of these off-topic individuals can post a day? Should at least slow them down.

I'm having a really hard time distinguishing discussion from this lovemaking.

 

On the topic of scanners, I still support my sonar idea. If it's still deemed overpowered, it's easy to change its impact by slowing or speeding the rotations. Or pulsing would be great too.

[ATX22]

Request for the Devs: Can you limit the number of times each of these off-topic individuals can post a day? Should at least slow them down.

I'm having a really hard time distinguishing discussion from this lovemaking.

 

On the topic of scanners, I still support my sonar idea. If it's still deemed overpowered, it's easy to change its impact by slowing or speeding the rotations. Or pulsing would be great too.

 

Don't scanners only really "break" the game when better than average players are involved?  If the actual scanning capability of the scanner were to be nerfed into the ground, maybe Reloaded could add another use for it.. maybe enhanced targeting for the seeker or hellfire rockets that allow for non-LOS targeting and enhanced tracking (pre nerfed style tracking).  Short lived, limited range, and limited per life usage (since it's a deployable).

[crockrocket]

Don't scanners only really "break" the game when better than average players are involved? If the actual scanning capability of the scanner were to be nerfed into the ground, maybe Reloaded could add another use for it.. maybe enhanced targeting for the seeker or hellfire rockets that allow for non-LOS targeting and enhanced tracking (pre nerfed style tracking). Short lived, limited range, and limited per life usage (since it's a deployable).

Only because below average players don't check radar enough.

[Hyginos]

Only because below average players don't check radar enough.

 

Some links to past discussion about in-game tutorial reworks!

[ArchMech]

on a less serious note:

I also like the idea of a Veteran or Beta tag or badge which identifies those of us who have been here before the relaunch and who own the legacy mech Loadouts.

EA did something similar with Battlefield 2 players who then bought Battlefield 2142. It worked quite well.

we need not "vet or beta tags", forum badges maybe, perhaps an in game "name border" like how nosgoth or something similar but that sounds clich�

theres alpha and beta skins, which if those are going anywhere, saying right now thats a bad idea

i do like the idea of a "veteran skin" tho since i dont think u can get the beta skin anymore, or can you?

anyway as far as the timeline of things is considered, theres a skin for alpha, theres a skin for beta, but theres no skin for everything between then and the "re-release" which would make for a good veteran skin! 

 

edit:

query, you can do this with limited amounts of effort ya? should do this for us! do it plz?

and yes, everybody hates the term veteran, which makes this perfect with a cherry on top if u do it

Edited by [email protected]/ArcanicFlame, 24 June 2016 - 09:17 AM.

[teeth_03]

Had a guy once pronounce the term in Battlefield BC2 "Veterinarian Status"

[Exilium]

Good afternoon. I would like to see changes:

1. I don't need to leave  G1 mech with 3 weapons, I'll break  balance, all mechs for new and old players should have the same opportunities after patch.

2..But I don't want to increase their level again. You can delete weapons, colors, body  and engines, but meteor credits must be returned, and mechs level remains the same( I have almost all mechs are level 6).

3. Air compressor and air 180 must be available to all by default as part of the game mechanics and not of internal, or, they should be removed from the game.

4. Every match should have the same number of mechs A, B and C class (for example 2+2+2). The technician and Incinerator is not more than 1for team. Incinerator does not have to cooling the technician endlessly, this greatly affects the balance.

5. Need to work much with stats and weapons for: Recruit, Bruiser,AG2,RG2. These mechs are unpopular, so you need to fix it)

 

Sorry for my English. With the best regards. Exilium.

[Csabi333]

OMG i already hate the nief, i will be hearing the whistles all day, I will be just dying to that. If the dps on the seeker is not nerfed i think i just ragequit this game all the time. I think its a really bad idea. No other A class mech will be able to compete with this bs on an open field