138 replies to this topic

[DerMax]

Yeah man that PN233 is just OP as hell. If only it were a projectile weapon.

 

You say hitscan primaries are too strong, failing to realize that the hitscan primaries also tend to be sustain primaries. Don't attribute problems with sustain weapons' numbers to them being hitscan.

If PN233 were projectile, it would be even weaker.

 

I know perfectly well the difference between hitscan and sustain, and I'm not sure why you brought this up. I'm talking specifically about hitscan.

[Hyginos]

I know perfectly well the difference between hitscan and sustain, and I'm not sure why you brought this up. I'm talking specifically about hitscan.

 
You said.
 

In the current PC iteration of Hawken, however, hitscan primaries are considerably stronger than projectile ones.

And I felt it was worth clarifying that hitscan primaries are stronger because they are sustain weapons with poorly adjusted numbers, not because they are hitscan.

[DerMax]

 

And I felt it was worth clarifying that hitscan primaries are stronger because they are sustain weapons with poorly adjusted numbers, not because they are hitscan.

Well, that much is obvious.

 

Hm. Let me think more about burst vs sustain and hitscan vs projectile.

Edited by DerMax, 15 August 2016 - 08:14 AM.

[DerMax]

After some thought: I think you're right that the problem is in burst vs sustain rather than hitscan vs projectile, and it can be solved with adjusting the numbers. However, I maintain that reducing the boost delay (which is, I think, absolutely necessary) will tilt the balance towards burst, so the numbers should be changed accordingly.

[StubbornPuppet]

After some thought: I think you're right that the problem is in burst vs sustain rather than hitscan vs projectile, and it can be solved with adjusting the numbers. However, I maintain that reducing the boost delay (which is, I think, absolutely necessary) will tilt the balance towards burst, so the numbers should be changed accordingly.

 

Having never been a fan of removing the raise weapon delay, I would suggest that creating a moment of weapon aim "inaccuracy" following a boost/dodge/landing would be more appropriate.

[CraftyDus]

this is now a

 

remove the delay

 

and

 

increase the speeds

 

thread

[hestoned]

In the current PC iteration of Hawken, however, hitscan primaries are considerably stronger than projectile ones. I attribute this to the exorbitant boost delay, high air speeds, no lag compensation and no accuracy penalty while mid-air.

it's funny. Hawken used to do that with air shots. the spread on flak for example was maybe twice what it is now if fired in the air. I think the devs said it was a bug or something.

[DerMax]

this is now a

 

remove the delay

 

and

 

increase the speeds

 

thread

Removing it would be disastrous. Reducing is the way.

[Flifang]

I know wracking one's brain over the near infinite possibilities in combat decisions this game presents at any one second is insanely inefficient, but I can't help but feel like any time such a deeply rooted game mechanic is discussed versus another a lot of factors get left out or looked over because it's easier to look at it cut and dry.

 

Like burst vs sustain for instance. 

 

When it comes to these two, sustain is most effective when you can shoot (and hit) a target until you finish them off. It doesn't make much sense to try and boost and dodge around when your target is outmatched and in the open. Even if you can evade your opponent shots all day, it's not in the person's best interest to dance around so much when the objective is to defeat your opponent. You have dps and range options as well as a lower risk of getting caught where you can't escape assuming you utilize the distance your optimal range gives you.

 

Burst should be played to its full effect differently though. Generally sporting much less dps, many burst mechs don't have the option to stand their ground like an assault can vs an opponent (if they want to survive that is). Heck, just getting that preemptive strike off on your opponent as a burst wielding mech can help even the playing field when severely out dps'd. Burst doesn't always have the range option sustain has either. Sometimes you HAVE to play sneaky to be able to do anything in a match aside from just yolo diving every time you respawn. Something with a sustain weapon can just find a nice lane or peek their head over a rise and peck at the opponents and be feet from a safe angle.  

 

There are so many more examples of things both combat mediums have going for them. There are so many gray areas too. Like hyginos said about the tech's prestige. I wouldn't classify that setup as burst, or sustain. That's a grey area caused by the mech's primary role.

 

Then there is the SS. Burst by definition, but the way it most effectively engages an opponent is pretty different than most burst mechs because it has so much more range. Yet, when it is put into a cqc situation, which by the way is not the optimal way to play even if it is badass; it then plays much like the other burst mechs but with a slight handicap. Another grey area.

 

Then there is the G2 assault. That's what I would consider a true sustain mech. But it's so fundamentally different than every other sustain mech in the PC build because of the lack of a projectile secondary. This mech has a very clear disadvantage over the other sustain mechs that have secondaries like the tow or GL when fighting on their terms. But once you get the drop on somebody and get in damage a little bit sooner than your opponent the playing field is evened out. I would argue that one of the most effective ways to engage with this mech is nearly identical to what many burst mechs benefit most from playstyle wise. Grey area.

 

The problem with the sustain mechs is not the sustain itself. It's the near perfect combination of burst and sustain you get in most of these "sustain" mechs. Secondaries like GL and Tow give you a way to punish a mistep on your opponent's part. Utility in not needing to aim perfectly due to splash damage or lock on, and even more utility in being able to remote detonate or bounce your shots around corners and off of objects is more valuable in combat than almost anything else. Your opponent has one more factor to worry about and take into account if they are to successfully take you on. With the burst vs sustain argument you're only getting half of the picture on one side, and I think that's precisely why reloaded made the assault standard with two vulcans. They understood the real problem with it. It does BOTH playstyles' jobs, at half the effort either of the individual, pure burst or sustain combo mechs can do.

[Hecatoncheires]

Whatever happened to the discussion about the importance of counterplay...?

I thought we were going to have an intense discussion about gameplay theory, not some rubbish about hitscan and projectile differences.

 

EOC is difficult to master and weak at the same time. Double whammy.

 

No amount of EOC Infil bullshittery will win you a fight against an equally skilled AR Zerker.

You said, "EOC is difficult to master," then said, "an equally skilled AR zerker." Not sure if you see what I'm pointing out here.

[CounterlogicMan]

Every mechanic in Hawken has counter play. As a facet of what potentially turns new players away, I think the counter play to many mechanics, and/or metas, in hawken are often poorly explained, and/or not very apparent, to new players. I believe this traces back to extremely lackluster and uninformative tooltips for items, internals, and weapons; a cryptic rating system for many of the weapon stats in the garage that isn't numerically or visually recognizable, or comparable, during gameplay; a tutorial that does not adequately prepare new players in terms of movement mechanics (the primary form of counter play in most situations); as well as no way to test internal/item/weapon/mech combinations freely in a game with many potential combinations. In conclusion, I think that saying Hawken lacks in counter play is not correct in the slightest. What it does lack is easy and painless access to tangible information for many of the mechanics that form the aforementioned counter play.

Edited by CounterlogicMan, 15 August 2016 - 10:29 PM.

[crockrocket]

-snip-

 

I completely agree. Fix the damn tutorial for starters. And I hadn't thought of it until you mentioned it, but making weapon/mech/item/internal stats and descriptions less opaque would also help a lot. I'm actually going to add that as a point on my player retention thread

[_incitatus]

 

No amount of EOC Infil bullshittery will win you a fight against an equally skilled AR Zerker.

 

I disagree to a point.  I think the situation matters here.  Plenty of cover and land your pucks, the EOC Inf is pretty effective. 

 

If you land an alpha, all A's go down pretty quickly.  Likewise if you can land your pucks on flying targets, you can win against a AR zerker.  Not every time, but its not impossible.

 

If the zerk catches you in the open with no cover around, you gon die.

 

But, I would really like to see an EOC buff in terms of increased puck speed to address spacebar/air doge heros.

 

IMO, the player who gets the drop usually wins. 

[coldform]

(Air dodge + fully charged EOC + MONEY NADE + det) � STRAIGHTTOTHEFACE = I fall down go boom.

[StubbornPuppet]

 

IMO, the player who gets the drop usually wins. 

 

I'm not a fan of that mechanic in modern FPS games.  Modern Warfare and all it's numerous clones are dreadful in this aspect.  Those games, to me, are a painful exercise in "I saw you first so you're dead/you saw me first so I'm dead".  I find that boring and tedious.  It limits my choices to learning how to hide until I see someone I can get the drop on and then hoping nobody else spots me while I'm killing them.

 

"Got the drop" kills were far less prevalent in Hawken before Ascension and the Steam update - which both increased game speed and lowered time to kill.

[coldform]

No matter how to measure the fight, it all boils down to the drop. Whether you land the first tow/nade, and force the opponent to miss, or you decieve and land the alpha, it's still the drop. Hawken distills down to a health race, and those that take that into account and are able to mitigate their loss in that race, as well as recognize when to push because they have more health, win the fight.

[StubbornPuppet]

No matter how to measure the fight, it all boils down to the drop. Whether you land the first tow/nade, and force the opponent to miss, or you decieve and land the alpha, it's still the drop. Hawken distills down to a health race, and those that take that into account and are able to mitigate their loss in that race, as well as recognize when to push because they have more health, win the fight.

 

But there was always more of a chance before the faster speeds and lower ttk.  While 'getting the drop' is always preferable, it's far more enjoyable to have time and options for counterplay to "the drop".  One of the most satisfying moments in any online game is being able to use your skills, tactics and strategies to overcome a player who got the drop on you and come out in a pinch.

[coldform]

But there was always more of a chance before the faster speeds and lower ttk. While 'getting the drop' is always preferable, it's far more enjoyable to have time and options for counterplay to "the drop". One of the most satisfying moments in any online game is being able to use your skills, tactics and strategies to overcome a player who got the drop on you and come out in a pinch.

The times have only gotten slower, not faster. The ttk is only slightly shorter. Ttk doesn't factor into one's ability to recover from an ambush, only skill.

[_incitatus]

(Air dodge + fully charged EOC + MONEY NADE + det) � STRAIGHTTOTHEFACE = I fall down go boom.

BURS! (#SWAG)

[StubbornPuppet]

No matter how to measure the fight, it all boils down to the drop. Whether you land the first tow/nade, and force the opponent to miss, or you decieve and land the alpha, it's still the drop. Hawken distills down to a health race, and those that take that into account and are able to mitigate their loss in that race, as well as recognize when to push because they have more health, win the fight.

 

 

But there was always more of a chance before the faster speeds and lower ttk.  While 'getting the drop' is always preferable, it's far more enjoyable to have time and options for counterplay to "the drop".  One of the most satisfying moments in any online game is being able to use your skills, tactics and strategies to overcome a player who got the drop on you and come out in a pinch.

 

 

The times have only gotten slower, not faster. The ttk is only slightly shorter. Ttk doesn't factor into one's ability to recover from an ambush, only skill.

 

I meant that the speed of mechs increased, because it did - both with Ascension and Steam.  But it didn't increase equivalent to the decrease in time to kill.

 

But, anyhow;

 

I disagree that ttk doesn't factor into one's ability to recover from an ambush.  Skill is, indeed, a part of that (a big part), but if I have more time before my death to maneuver, get to a cover point or around a corner and engage in some form of counter-play before my health pool is gone.  A higher time to kill means more opportunity to both think about and engage in tactics and skills that could reverse the situation.

[Silverfire]

I meant that the speed of mechs increased, because it did - both with Ascension and Steam.  But it didn't increase equivalent to the decrease in time to kill.

 

 

I mean if you had numbers regarding the direct speed increases of the mechs across patches that'd be great but you don't so I'll do it for you

 

mechs have actually gotten somewhat slower but pace has arguably increased due to the no-fuel cost of dodging and the introduction of viable air speeds compared to pre-Ascension.

 

gotta find the balance between TTK and pace and the style of gameplay you want promoted.  A low TTK would help offensive gameplay, a high TTK would promote defensive gameplay.  The mechs could be as fast, or as slow as you want, but with raising TTK may make the game play slower simply because it takes longer to kill people, and there's more opportunity to retreat, repair, and get back up.  This can potentially lead to much more chokepoint bottlenecking and slowing down of gameplay.

 

 

A lower TTK has its place in Hawken with helping the pace of the game as well as getting people away from defensive gameplay and encouraging attacking.  Not too low though, obviously.

 

 

Let's just not confuse speed of mechs with pace of the game.

 

 

I don't want a slow game in terms of pace.

 

I meant that the speed of mechs increased, because it did - both with Ascension and Steam.  But it didn't increase equivalent to the decrease in time to kill.

 

But, anyhow;

 

I disagree that ttk doesn't factor into one's ability to recover from an ambush.  Skill is, indeed, a part of that (a big part), but if I have more time before my death to maneuver, get to a cover point or around a corner and engage in some form of counter-play before my health pool is gone.  A higher time to kill means more opportunity to both think about and engage in tactics and skills that could reverse the situation.

 

Edited by Silverfire, 17 August 2016 - 10:47 AM.

[CraftyDus]

  A higher time to kill means more opportunity to both think about and engage in tactics and skills that could reverse the situation.

 

So is that to say a higher ttk panders to slow thinkers and slow reactors?

 

I wouldn't equate "skill" with an inability to think and react quickly.

 

I would say that Hawken shouldn't change in order to pander to those differently abled, intellectually and developmentally.

[StubbornPuppet]

 A higher time to kill means more opportunity to both think about and engage in tactics and skills that could reverse the situation.

 

So is that to say a higher ttk panders to slow thinkers and slow reactors?

 

I wouldn't equate "skill" with an inability to think and react quickly.

 

I would say that Hawken shouldn't change in order to pander to those differently abled, intellectually and developmentally.

 

Wow.  I generally don't react to this kind of provocation and mocking, but "get bent".   Implying that anyone who doesn't agree with or equal your assessment of what constitutes quick thinking is intellectually and developmentally disabled is truly distasteful and shows a great deal of egotistical conceit.  I wouldn't expect you'd need to stoop to calling people who disagree with you handicapped.

 

That aside, it doesn't matter how intellectually and developmentally superior you are, "more time to think and react is more time to think and react for everyone".  Sure, one person may come to the same conclusion faster than the next, and may even have better reflexes, but give even the most gifted of players more time and they will be able to refine those decisions and tune their reaction more precisely.

 

Your preference for faster speeds and lower ttk is an indication of just that, preference.  It's not an indication that anyone who prefers otherwise has special needs.  By that logic, anyone who listens to speed metal is a flipping genius and people who prefer classical music trip-hop belong in a group home.

 

EDITED: I concede that classical music was a poor example, it's not defined by the tempo.  So I used Trip-Hop as a better example because it's chill.

Edited by StubbornPuppet, 17 August 2016 - 01:04 PM.

[Hyginos]

Being able to kill someone just by having the drop or serendipity is, IIRC, precisely why ADH lowered the TTK. It gives newer and less skilled players more of a chance to happen on to kills against more skilled players.

[CraftyDus]

 anyone who listens to speed metal is a flipping genius and people who prefer classical music belong in a group home.

 

I think about classical music and speed metal as being quite closely related.

I think Paganini and Steve Vai are very slightly different shades of similar italian virtuosity on stringed instruments seperated by merely a couple hundred years.

They are regarded as virtuosos because of their technical dexterity at speed.

They both could obviously play slower pieces, and have demonstrated their appreciation for slower music.

But slower music wasn't what made them interesting as performers.

And I'm not interested in slowing down hawken in order for slower thinking players to be able to understand what faster thinking players are doing to them.

 

 

 

 

Edited by CraftyDus, 17 August 2016 - 11:18 AM.

[Silverfire]

I really like classical music and you have to be pretty fuzzy bunnyng good and smart enough to play classical music, it's also really fast

 

 

did I mention that classical music isn't slow

Edited by Silverfire, 17 August 2016 - 11:37 AM.

[Silverfire]

Also, a higher TTK, or, apparently, "more time to think and react" does not necessarily raise the skill ceiling or make things harder.  If you are given 15 minutes to solve a math problem, does that mean it's a hard math problem? It could as simple as 2+2 but given 15 minutes to solve, it must be incredibly difficult because you have so much time to solve it!

Edited by Silverfire, 17 August 2016 - 11:46 AM.

[Mevaker]

I think about classical music and speed metal as being quite closely related.

I think Paganini and Steve Vai are very slightly different shades of similar italian virtuosity on stringed instruments seperated by merely a couple hundred years.

They are regarded as virtuosos because of their technical dexterity at speed.

They both could obviously play slower pieces, and have demonstrated their appreciation for slower music.

But slower music wasn't what made them interesting as performers.

And I'm not interested in slowing down hawken in order for slower thinking players to be able to understand what faster thinking players are doing to them.

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately, what you are apparently missing is that it's not about faster/slower thinkers, Dus. It's about not getting instantly deleted simply because someone spotted you first. Yes, you can focus your 'skills' on a very specific direction, dedicated to getting "the drop" on someone, and that can be your thing, but it's not everyone's thing. The Idea here is that "ok, someone got the drop on me, i need to think fast, but what are my options." VS "holy smokes, what the fuzzy bunny was that?" does it necessarily mean we are pandering to slow-thinking newbs who do not belong i this game, no, just offering a different point of view. I have my own reasons for preferring a slower pace of game/TTK. But that's me, and I am not a necessarily slow thinker.

[Silverfire]

The Idea here is that "ok, someone got the drop on me, i need to think fast, but what are my options." VS "holy smokes, what the fuzzy bunny was that?" 

 

This is not the difference between high and low TTK but rather a high and low skill player's thoughts when they "get the drop".  Poor analogy.

Edited by Silverfire, 17 August 2016 - 12:04 PM.

[StubbornPuppet]

Classical music was a bad choice.  It is not defined by it's tempo (and what really makes it "classical" anyhow?).

 

I changed my example to Trip-Hop.  That's slow and chill and takes time to work on you.

 

The main point was "don't equate a persons taste for a slower paced entertainment and situations with them having a disability."  Stephen Hawking has some damn slow reflexes and reaction times, has a terrible disability... but would you ever question his intelligence?

Edited by StubbornPuppet, 17 August 2016 - 01:07 PM.

[CounterlogicMan]

(Air dodge + fully charged EOC + MONEY NADE + det) � STRAIGHTTOTHEFACE = I fall down go boom.

 

I like ur EOC fu.

 

As an EOC fu master, can confirm the burst is stronk in the right hands.

 

example 1.b3 verse 3 from book of EOC fu chapter 4: art of the burst 

 

 

 

I can say from experience anyone who likes EOC fu will love the CIV.

 

On a side note, I do think the console version EOC is fine where it is at challenging but rewarding. The pc version EOC does need a slight buff though.

Edited by CounterlogicMan, 17 August 2016 - 02:29 PM.

[CraftyDus]

Stephen Hawking has some damn slow reflexes and reaction times, has a terrible disability...

I would destroy Stephen Hawking in a game of Hawken.
I think adjusting the ttk in Hawken to accommodate the physical abilities of people completely paralyzed by ALS isn't a good idea.

Edited by CraftyDus, 17 August 2016 - 02:40 PM.

[Flifang]

If you don't trust your reaction speeds under sudden pressure, plan ahead so you won't have to react as drastically or won't be at as much risk when reacting.

 

Drive slower and give more room between you and the car in front of you in icy or very wet conditions.

 

Put yourself in a spot that would be very difficult to ambush you at, or a spot where you have a plan of escape.

 

Play something beefier than an a-class if you're afraid of being insta-gibbed and if there are mechs on the opposing side who can do it.

 

Edit: Basically what I'm saying is this isn't just a FPS, this is a real time strategy game. Your ability to make good decisions when you're playing is just as important as being able to aim and shoot as well as your opponent. Penalizing players who are able to set up an alpha strike, for the sake of fairness in face to face combat would be a tragic change to the game. 

Edited by Flifang, 17 August 2016 - 05:23 PM.

[coldform]

Basically what I'm saying is this isn't just a FPS, this is a real time strategy game. Your ability to make good decisions when you're playing is just as important as being able to aim and shoot as well as your opponent. Penalizing players who are able to set up an alpha strike, for the sake of fairness in face to face combat would be a tragic change to the game.

[DieselCat]

*+ 

Edited by DieselCat, 17 August 2016 - 08:12 PM.

[DieselCat]

 *+

Edited by DieselCat, 17 August 2016 - 08:11 PM.

[Mevaker]

If you don't trust your reaction speeds under sudden pressure, plan ahead so you won't have to react as drastically or won't be at as much risk when reacting.

 

Drive slower and give more room between you and the car in front of you in icy or very wet conditions.

 

Put yourself in a spot that would be very difficult to ambush you at, or a spot where you have a plan of escape.

 

Play something beefier than an a-class if you're afraid of being insta-gibbed and if there are mechs on the opposing side who can do it.

 

Edit: Basically what I'm saying is this isn't just a FPS, this is a real time strategy game. Your ability to make good decisions when you're playing is just as important as being able to aim and shoot as well as your opponent. Penalizing players who are able to set up an alpha strike, for the sake of fairness in face to face combat would be a tragic change to the game. 

and likewise ONLY rewarding those who can set up an alpha strike, for the sake of satisfying your desire to destroy papier-mache robots while allowing zero room to learn how to do anything else, is a bit extreme, as well, all I'm saying find a balance, too long of a TTK and things get stale, too short (like less than one millionth of a second) and it becomes off putting for the person on the receiving end.

 

Edit: You are right on 1 point though,, this is not just an fps, it is also a mech game, with varying levels (classes) and styles of mech durability and speed, should an A class run circles around a class C? sure, but should a class C not have some means to respond to compensate? and what about the class B? not fast enough to keep up with the class A and not armored enough to survive a full burst

Edited by Mevaker, 18 August 2016 - 06:04 AM.

[Silverfire]

Why should you even be rewarded for putting yourself in a position to get alpha striked?  Aren't you supposed to learn from your mistakes? Not repair in that spot, not repair in the open, always be moving, be aware of your surroundings, etc.?

 

 

 

And what other thing should we do other than reward a player who can set up an alpha strike?  That seems like a just reward for doing something like that.

Edited by Silverfire, 18 August 2016 - 06:45 AM.

[_incitatus]

 

Edit: You are right on 1 point though,, this is not just an fps, it is also a mech game, with varying levels (classes) and styles of mech durability and speed, should an A class run circles around a class C? sure, but should a class C not have some means to respond to compensate? and what about the class B? not fast enough to keep up with the class A and not armored enough to survive a full burst

 

C class has a large health pool to compensate for lack of movement.  B class has balance of mobility and health, well rounded - can absolutely survive Alpha strikes and can still move around pretty well.  A class gives up health for mobility.  Seems pretty balanced.

 

Talk about increased TTK to a Reaper facing a Brawler.  Or any A class facing a C class.  It already takes a while.

[coldform]

There seems to be two different playstyles to hawken. The first is typically what new players experience, along with seasoned casual players, and the second, those with the ability to either apply tons of hawken combat experience, or just have a flat out higher level of skill, or both.

In the first, people play what looks and feels cool - the bruiser and rocketeer are staples, the scout feels overpowered, and the assault stands out as the most powerful mech in the game. Technicians are prevalent, and positioning is grossly misused.

In the second scene, bruiser, rocketeer, battletech, and to a lesser extent, mini flak scout, all but dissappear. All other mechs and loadouts - with the exception of orbwhore - become more balanced, as players tend to rely on their core mechanical skills and combat experience more, and mech choices are only a small extension of that aspect.

The difference in these two arenas is night and day. While both are enjoyable in their own right by those who are part if them, one should consider what a change to the game would affect both. A change to one of these arenas could possibly have a negative affect on another.