174 replies to this topic

[talon70]

I will spend money on MC if It will all go to C05 to buy as many cups of coffee as possible to keep up the good work.

 

His 'mini-tech groups' should be an easy answer to the orbwhore issue.

 

Thanks for the coms

[Silverfire]

EMP thing might just straight up be a bug tbh, because I've never seen an EMP ignore hack before particularly because it implies the hacker is actually trying to play instead of Reaper/Sharpie aimbot his or her way through a match like normal.

Edited by Silverfire, 27 October 2016 - 02:55 PM.

[KamikazeCommando]

Could be, I am rather cynical about these kinda issues- I'd have to record the same thing happening to just one person repeatedly to be sure it was haxorz ( once is a bug, over & over, not so much probably ).

[Dedhed]

Best Dev update in a while. Thanks CZeroFive and everyone else, community and devs alike. Hawken is looking like a better place now than a few months ago. 

[-Tj-]

C05, thanks for addressing us directly and keeping us updated, and for interacting with the community in the way we've wanted and expected the devs to do since the beginning. It means a lot to us, and I know it means extra work on your part (and extra fanning or putting out of fires).

 

I've been silent for a little bit because of life stuff, but I found some time today and wanted to chime in with the rest, though I know a lot of what I'll be talking about may have already been addressed or discussed.

 

Reintroduction of multiple weapons, items, internals:

 

I'm honestly not sure why this was removed in the first place. Customization has been part of Hawken practically from the very beginning, and it adds a lot of depth to each mech. It was limited to certain weapons early on for good reason. Limiting every mech to a locked set of weapons, items, and internals may sound like a good idea for gameplay, kinda like creating a limited move set for a fighting game character, but Hawken isn't a fighting game, and in an FPS, variety keeps things spicy.

 

The original devs definitely tried some different methods of customization, such as changing from a completely open weapon customization system, to a minimal set of weapon choices per mech with a swappable internal system, to a points system, and now to what we've got on PC now. What we have now could (and should) certainly be built upon.

 

Weapons:

 

The 3 primaries + 1 secondary works well. I wouldn't mind if some mechs had a slightly different loadout, but for the most part everything is pretty good where it is. I believe I had mentioned this before, some time ago, but I feel that Hawken could definitely benefit from alternate versions of current weapons. In other words, make variants of weapons already existing on current mechs. For example, on the Infiltrator, the secondary is the Grenade Launcher. This weapon works really well on the Infiltrator since the longer flight and remote detonation ability allows it to fire a grenade, move cloaked, and deal damage, but as fun as the weapon is, after hundreds of hours playing the same loadout, I would definitely love to see some variants such as a sticky grenade, a grenade with a larger radius but lower damage, a camera grenade that sticks to surfaces and allows an Infil pilot to see from that camera and can detonate it for a very low amount of damage (or other players can destroy it if they see it, and only one should be able to be active at a time), etc. Or how about a reflective TOW, one that can rebound off surfaces like the Reflak, but does lower damage and maybe doesn't have remote det ability (and for fun, can totally reflect back at the player who fired it and kill them)? How about a flamethrower version of the SAARE? Of course, I'm talking about secondary weapons here, but I strongly feel the same could be applied to the primaries as well. I really like seeing unique weapons that can emphasize the abilities of the mechs.

 

Internals:

 

The Orblord combo is definitely a point of contention here. I mentioned before that I feel that the orbs should be restricted to a maximum absorption rate so that even if 2 or 3 orbs are being absorbed, they never exceed the maximum rate. The Orblord combo could work on this, but if it's only increasing the maximum absorption rate instead of more than one orb, then I don't think it would be as big an issue since there would be an absolute cap.

 

Going on higher-slot internals sounds like a good idea, and I like the idea of adding negative stats to them as well, as long as the negative stats make sense. It wouldn't make sense to have a 6 slot internal that not only takes up those 6 slots so nothing else could be equipped, but also adds a heavy negative stat that makes the internal next to useless as a choice.

 

Specialized high-slot internals would also be a fun idea. Stuff that does maybe 2 things at once but takes up like 4 to 6 slots would be neat.

 

Items:

 

3 slot items only... no, I don't like this idea. In addition to the 1 slot item that speeds up the item reload speed (7 seconds down to 5, iirc), I feel like this system should be expanded upon instead of dumbed down. Make this more customizable, not less. For example, how about a 5 slot item that regenerates a 1 slot item, but adds a negative stat of increasing the reload time (instead of 7 seconds, it becomes 14 seconds, or something like that)? How about a 3 or 4 slot item that further decreases the reload time of the items (maybe to 2 to 3 seconds), but limits your choices of item combinations? There's so much potential here that I really can't believe you folks are considering going backwards here. You went backwards by removing customization options in the first place... don't make the same mistake again.

 

 

Again, I'm glad you're reaching out to us, C05, especially after Josh went silent and Tiggs started posting for him. I hope this doesn't happen with you, too, and I gotta thank you for taking the time to reach out to us. I do, however, have my reservations of what you folks are capable of in terms of improving the game with new gameplay stuff. Everything I've seen so far has been either loadout changes, stat changes, or engine optimizations, for the most part. The Charge Cannon seems neat, but I wouldn't hesitate to guess that it was already built by Adhesive and you guys just put it into the game. The suggestions made to the internals are also stat changes, with the addition of new versions of the same internals. I would really like to see you guys work on new stuff... like really actually new stuff that we haven't seen before. I hope my reservations are understandable, and I'm not saying this stuff to be petty. I'm genuinely concerned for the game, and I don't want my favorite game to go in a direction none of us fans really want it to go.

[nepacaka]

yay. i was quite impressed. have no idea about what devs talking, but josh is alive! :P
https://www.twitch.t...wken/v/97663483

[MomOw]

About "negative effects" on internals slot I think that you may have different implementation of it :

1) If any mech comes fully loaded, there is no need of side effects, as alternate internals already "negates" the effect of the starting internals.

2) If the newly bought mechs are "naked", yes side effects of internals can be meaningfull.

 

I prefer the first option. Swap a deflector for an armor fusor ? you'll have a negative effect : no more damage reduction while boosting/dodging. To emphasis that just display in red what you'll lose and in white what you'll gain.

Edited by MomOw, 30 October 2016 - 01:54 AM.

[CZeroFive]

3 slot items only... no, I don't like this idea. In addition to the 1 slot item that speeds up the item reload speed (7 seconds down to 5, iirc), I feel like this system should be expanded upon instead of dumbed down. Make this more customizable, not less. For example, how about a 5 slot item that regenerates a 1 slot item, but adds a negative stat of increasing the reload time (instead of 7 seconds, it becomes 14 seconds, or something like that)? How about a 3 or 4 slot item that further decreases the reload time of the items (maybe to 2 to 3 seconds), but limits your choices of item combinations? There's so much potential here that I really can't believe you folks are considering going backwards here. You went backwards by removing customization options in the first place... don't make the same mistake again.

 

It's more of a technical limitation of consoles, to be honest - there's simply not enough buttons on a controller to support more than two items. That, and we've seen more positive gameplay by limiting the number of items you have available to you at once when that functionality was introduced on consoles. It is less confusing to the end user and limits the scenario for having imbalanced combinations, especially as we add items and internals to the game that allow you to further define loadouts.

 

I am, however, okay with the idea of different ranked internals having different cooldowns. That is something we can revisit hopefully sooner than later.

[DerMax]

C05, while you're here:

 

There will be people who'll ask you to make air-dodging into a game mechanic available to all mechs. Please don't listen to these people; they're barking mad.

[nepacaka]

if i'm ask to delete or rework air-dodge internal into something else (like +2 m/s dodge speed, or +2m/s dodge distance), i'm sick? AC gave me a cancer. I wanna my old ha?ken, without jumping mechs maded from paper, where flying in fight was punished. consoles actually did it right now, except some mech who have AC as a default internal.

Edited by nepacaka, 30 October 2016 - 05:25 AM.

[wischatesjesus]

It's more of a technical limitation of consoles, to be honest - there's simply not enough buttons on a controller to support more than two items.

 
One button cycles one button fires. Infinite number of items: supported.
 
There's even a button map that already exists to do this on the pc version

 

C05, while you're here:
 
There will be people who'll ask you to make air-dodging into a game mechanic available to all mechs. Please don't listen to these people; they're barking mad people with passable aim who like variety.

FTFY.

Edited by wischatesjesus, 30 October 2016 - 06:29 AM.

[DallasCreeper]

yay. i was quite impressed. have no idea about what devs talking, but josh is alive! :P
https://www.twitch.t...wken/v/97663483

The devs actually play the game they develop?! neat

[SuupaaFly]

if one sabot is good two is better

[nepacaka]

The devs actually play the game they develop?! neat

yeah. i don't want to tell that they are nubs, but they should read some game guides, or watch some vids from community players, who making videos for youtube :P

[DerMax]

 

FTFY.

Think I don't have passable aim?

 

That aside, air-dodging in its current form is dumb, immersion-breaking and counter-productive for new-ish players. As I've said numerous times, I'm not against air-dodging per se, I'm against the existing implementation.

[wischatesjesus]

Think I don't have passable aim?

That or you hate variety. And fun. You monster.
 

That aside, air-dodging in its current form is dumb...

On what basis do you assert this to be the case?
 

...immersion-breaking...

Mechs can hover and dodge separately. Combining the two really is not all that baffling or even that much of an extrapolation.

 

Also lol. Immersion. Considering the direction Howken has gone its safe to say this is very low on the list for RLD, probably below even "hire more devs" and "facilitate community events".
 

... and counter-productive for new-ish players.

 

On what basis do you assert this to be the case?
 

As I've said numerous times, I'm not against air-dodging per se, I'm against the existing implementation.

I'm too lazy to find previous discussions. Care to offer your alternative solution?

[comic_sans]

Think I don't have passable aim?

 

That aside, air-dodging in its current form is dumb, immersion-breaking and counter-productive for new-ish players. As I've said numerous times, I'm not against air-dodging per se, I'm against the existing implementation.

 

Don't do this, derman.

[DerMax]

Don't do this, derman.

Yeah yeah. But tell me, wouldn't it be more fun if air-dodging didn't nullify the momentum? I think it absolutely would. And I think it'd be better and healthier for the game.

Edited by DerMax, 30 October 2016 - 10:23 AM.

[TheButtSatisfier]

What's the concern with implementing air dodge across all mechs? Are those concerned players worried that there'll be too much air dodging afoot?

 

Air dodging can be easily managed by tweaking the air dodge fuel consumption rates, air dodge distances, and hover burn rates on a mech-by-mech basis. If a C-class wants to boost up in the air and throw a dodge in for good measure, then I don't give two shtis because now they've burned up a tremendous amount of fuel they can't use on the ground. It's up to the devs to strike that balance, but I think it can be done.

 

Seriously though, I think it's worth debating this point. I'm open to being convinced that it's not a good idea, I just want to know why.

[Silverfire]

What's the concern with implementing air dodge across all mechs? Are those concerned players worried that there'll be too much air dodging afoot?

 

Air dodging can be easily managed by tweaking the air dodge fuel consumption rates, air dodge distances, and hover burn rates on a mech-by-mech basis. If a C-class wants to boost up in the air and throw a dodge in for good measure, then I don't give two shtis because now they've burned up a tremendous amount of fuel they can't use on the ground. It's up to the devs to strike that balance, but I think it can be done.

 

Seriously though, I think it's worth debating this point. I'm open to being convinced that it's not a good idea, I just want to know why.

 

 

Seriously though, I think it's worth debating this point. I'm open to being convinced that it's not a good idea, I just want to know why.

 

 I'm open to being convinced that it's not a good idea

 

 I'm open to being convinced that it

 

 I'm open to it

 

 

is that you josh?

Edited by Silverfire, 30 October 2016 - 05:06 PM.

[wischatesjesus]

Yeah yeah. But tell me, wouldn't it be more fun if air-dodging didn't nullify the momentum? I think it absolutely would. And I think it'd be better and healthier for the game.

 

This has nothing to do with universal air dodge.

[Call_Me_Ishmael]

Air dodge as currently implemented is a crutch for bad players who should feel bad for using it.

 

It's immersion-breaking: a real pilot would have his brains scrambled.

 

It's bad gameplay: it breaks the laws of physics as Der noted.

 

AC is a crutch in real gameplay.

 

I want to fight pilots who are good without it.  Legitimately GOOD pilots.

 

 

(edited for spelling)

Edited by Call_Me_Ishmael, 30 October 2016 - 04:37 PM.

[-Tj-]

One button cycles one button fires. Infinite number of items: supported.

There's even a button map that already exists to do this on the pc version

This. There is no reason only two items should be supported. The PC version allows a player to use the scroll wheel to choose an item and a single button to deploy it. There's only a maximum of 3 possible items loadable at the moment, so even if it's just one button to cycle items and another to fire, it wouldn't be that big a deal. I mainly use only 2 items most of the time and my button map works well, but when I have a 3rd item, the cycle-to-select method works just fine. This is because the third item is usually tertiary, something I don't need to deploy in the heat of the moment.

[CZeroFive]

 
One button cycles one button fires. Infinite number of items: supported.

 

In the heat of battle on consoles, you can't reasonably expect people to be comfortable with that control scheme, especially casual players. It just doesn't work. We've tried, playtested it and the last thing Hawken needs is more confusing control schemes.

 

No amount of button rebinding will solve that either. Especially if we ever do cross-platform play somewhere down the road. PC players would have to use one press as opposed to the 3-4 cycles that a console player will have to do. That is a lot to think about for a console player, and would destroy the notion that someone could pick up and play on a PC in the same way they do on a console.

Edited by CZeroFive, 30 October 2016 - 06:15 PM.

[6ixxer]

I play PC with a joystick and have bound an item scroll and an item use button.

Its not that bad.

I can understand having a two item system though, I never use 3 items these days.

[wischatesjesus]

Especially if we ever do cross-platform play somewhere down the road.

 
...you're still seriously considering that?
 
 

Air dodge as currently implemented is a crutch for bad players who should feel bad for using it.

On what basis do you assert this to be the case?

 

It's immersion-breaking: a real pilot would have his brains scrambled.

It's bad gameplay: it breaks the laws of physics as Der noted.

It wouldn't scramble the brains of a pilot any more than, say, a jump pad or a regular dodge after boost. Not to mention defying the laws of physics with air dodge while accepting that mechs can fly straight upward using backward facing thrusters and negative gravity materials is a bit comical in my mind.

 

AC is a crutch in real gameplay.

I want to fight pilots who are good without it. Legitimately GOOD pilots.

On what basis do you assert this to be the case? Also serial smurfing and avoiding all forms of comp play are not conducive to fighting legitimately good pilots.

I see a few reasonable arguments in this thread for changing how air dodge interacts with vertical momentum, especially as it pertains to jump pads, but the arguments I see against both its current implementation and against the idea of universal air dodge just look like "it is a bad thing that bad players do" or "I don't like it"

[StubbornPuppet]

In the heat of battle on consoles, you can't reasonably expect people to be comfortable with that control scheme, especially casual players. It just doesn't work. We've tried, playtested it and the last thing Hawken needs is more confusing control schemes.
 
No amount of button rebinding will solve that either. Especially if we ever do cross-platform play somewhere down the road. PC players would have to use one press as opposed to the 3-4 cycles that a console player will have to do. That is a lot to think about for a console player, and would destroy the notion that someone could pick up and play on a PC in the same way they do on a console.

I also play with a controller and have a "change item" and "deploy item" bound... it's far from confusing - especially considering it's kind of been the standard in gaming for decades.

[nepacaka]

I never use swap items button, because it is unusable. I just use Q and E for two items, because if you need use shield, u just throw it in one click, but with prev/next button, you need click 2 buttons instead one. It is one more button, I'm too lazy for this.
Ideally, better have some mouse button for throwing item, for hold it (if required, like HE grenade) without losing a movement controls. (because when you hold Q, you can't press A, and when you hold E, you can't press D, it is mean, I losing left and right movement and dodges in these ways, this is why I never use items like HE grnade. But, I'm throwing shield far away sometimes, but it is rare situations.
Anyway, my mouse don't have additional buttons like gamers mouse, so, I can actually use R button for third button, but find it a little ucomfortable. I mean, I better bind special third button, and still use one click for throwing item, than have only 2 button, but need make 2 or 3 clicks in fight. It is waste of time.

It is my own problems maybe, but I love very simple controls in hawken, you actually need only wasd, lmb+rmb, q+e and shift/space. It is actually only 2 buttons, because wasd+mouse, and shift+space is a standart for shooters (shift=run, space=jump) Not very hard and very simple, and you not need move your hand. Almost all mechs use this controls, except rocketeer, raider, and snipers, cuz they need one more button for weapon. one more button - it is bad.

[TheButtSatisfier]

Air dodge as currently implemented is a crutch for bad players who should feel bad for using it.

 

Frankly, that's BS and you know it.

 

I've seen my fair share of no-AC purists and even forewent using AC myself for a time to focus on groundplay, but someone who uses AC intelligently forces their opponent to aim in more directions than side-to-side. It can help with corner play because now the enemy player doesn't know if you're going to poke out with a TOW to their face on ground level or 1+ mech height in the air. A boost-jump-dodge maneuver means an enemy player can trace your initial movement path on the ground, but the return dodge is higher on the y or z axis (depending on your POV) and can break the trace more easily than a ground-level back and forth.

 

Like almost every other mechanic, there's times when using AC can be effective, and there's times where it can be overused. We laugh at new players who float and use AC almost exclusively, but I don't see that being much different than a ground-based player who hangs out in turret mode or never uses dodge. They're all symptoms of someone learning how to do better at this game.

 

But only saying it's a crutch for bad players significantly oversimplifies the utilities of that internal / mechanic for the sake of what sounds like an impressive bias.

Edited by TheButtSatisfier, 31 October 2016 - 07:59 AM.

[nepacaka]

Also, how about bug when AC don't cost fuel after jumper. And AC and air180 still stop consume fuel when you use it (I mean, you use it, and hold space, but fuel stop burning, which is ridiculous bug with air180). My own opinion, it is bug and should be fixed, I don't think that this is "feature".

The same with jumping. I feel bad with it, when you use jumping, and moving a ill faster, or even with the same speed, but consume less fuel. Why? When you use it you give ability shooting while moving forward (for example with flak), at the same time player who just use boost, moving slower, can't shoot, have a higher weapon delay when stop, and waste more fuel. Why? Imho, mech should consume little more fuel when use jumping for moving, than people who just use boost and press shift, It will be more honest.
Boost should be fastest way to move. But if you want using some additional thing, you should cost some fuel (for example, if enemy runaway from you, and you jumping for stay close to him as much as possible, and shoot flak+tow in his back). But jumping for movement just because you can... I think it is not right, and it is stupid when you see a jumping mech which just goes for EU.

I don't know how explain this, but I feel this is wrong behavior for mechs.
At least, devs can try tweaking it, to making jumps and boost equal with fuel and distance.

[TheButtSatisfier]

I'd always envisioned a boosting mech on the ground as one that is dragging it's feet, which causes a lot of friction. The mech that boosts in the air is going to consume some fuel for the initial jump, but the friction (and therefore fuel usage) once in the air should be less. In real life, air travel is the most efficient mode of travel for vehicles too until you get into space travel.

 

That's how my mind addresses the different fuel consumption rates between ground boosting vs. boost-hopping.

[Amidatelion]

Also, how about bug when AC don't cost fuel after jumper. And AC and air180 still stop consume fuel when you use it (I mean, you use it, and hold space, but fuel stop burning, which is ridiculous bug with air180). My own opinion, it is bug and should be fixed, I don't think that this is "feature".

The same with jumping. I feel bad with it, when you use jumping, and moving a ill faster, or even with the same speed, but consume less fuel. Why? When you use it you give ability shooting while moving forward (for example with flak), at the same time player who just use boost, moving slower, can't shoot, have a higher weapon delay when stop, and waste more fuel. Why? Imho, mech should consume little more fuel when use jumping for moving, than people who just use boost and press shift, It will be more honest.
Boost should be fastest way to move. But if you want using some additional thing, you should cost some fuel (for example, if enemy runaway from you, and you jumping for stay close to him as much as possible, and shoot flak+tow in his back). But jumping for movement just because you can... I think it is not right, and it is stupid when you see a jumping mech which just goes for EU.

I don't know how explain this, but I feel this is wrong behavior for mechs.
At least, devs can try tweaking it, to making jumps and boost equal with fuel and distance.

 

If I understand you correctly, this is partially untrue. There is a greater fuel loss on start of boost and the only mechs that maintain their speed sufficiently while bunny-hopping like this to overcome the fuel drain are A-classes and the Raider.

[nepacaka]

If I understand you correctly, this is partially untrue. There is a greater fuel loss on start of boost and the only mechs that maintain their speed sufficiently while bunny-hopping like this to overcome the fuel drain are A-classes and the Raider.

if you press it a very fast, even brawler don't have this "fuel loss" when start moving, but yes, they can't probably moving faster with this. 
anyway, this system not working correct, and working different for different classes. it is bad.

[DerMax]

I've seen my fair share of no-AC purists and even forewent using AC myself for a time to focus on groundplay

I've never seen you play anything but Brawler, although my knowledge here is limited and you might play other mechs a fair bit as well. If not, "foregoing using AC" sounds humorous.

 

but someone who uses AC intelligently forces their opponent to aim in more directions than side-to-side.

Someone who ground-dodges intelligently achieves exactly the same thing. You can angle-dodge forward and backward, and you can jump-dodge with structures (e.g. jump on a bridge banner on Prosk and immediately dodge from it, doing something quite similar to an air-dodge). So, I'm not sure how this phrase contributes to your argument.

 

It can help with corner play because now the enemy player doesn't know if you're going to poke out with a TOW to their face on ground level or 1+ mech height in the air.

Barely matters if you aim in between 1 and 2 mech heights, which is what I do if I don't know what to expect from my opponent, which is not often the case.

 

A boost-jump-dodge maneuver means an enemy player can trace your initial movement path on the ground, but the return dodge is higher on the y or z axis (depending on your POV) and can break the trace more easily than a ground-level back and forth.

People tend to overuse this unoriginal move and fall victim to its illusory effectiveness in high-mmr lobbies. However, it works wonders below 2200, which teaches people that using it all the time is beneficial, so they do just that.

 

Like almost every other mechanic, there's times when using AC can be effective, and there's times where it can be overused.

Overusing it in lower-tier matches is almost always effective, which, again, teaches people the wrong thing. I've seen this first-hand countless times.

 

We laugh at new players who float and use AC almost exclusively, but I don't see that being much different than a ground-based player who hangs out in turret mode or never uses dodge.

See above.

 

But only saying it's a crutch for bad players significantly oversimplifies the utilities of that internal / mechanic for the sake of what sounds like an impressive bias.

Might be true, but just because a mechanic increases the number of available options and utilities, thus increasing the skill cap (ostensibly), doesn't mean it is a good addition to the game. Applied to movement, not any internal that adds movement options is necessarily positive. Imagine an internal that lets you fly up indefinitely, until you run out of fuel. Or one that lets you back-dodge. Or one that changes shift+s to 90 degrees from 180.

Edited by DerMax, 31 October 2016 - 09:23 AM.

[wischatesjesus]

Wait, Dermax, so are you saying that we should not make AC universal because it is a noob trap? That we should remove it because it is a noob trap? You seem to suggest that it becomes less useful in high tier lobbies, but in my mind that is not at all an argument against AC's implementation.

 

Tangentially, I fairly sure butt hit 2600 mmr in a ground scout before he found Brawler Jesus.

[nepacaka]

player who hangs out in turret mode or never uses dodge.

 

I want to add about turrets. this is only because THEY CAN use it. 

i don't know why brawler and rocketeer have it. i love brawler turret, but i very rare use it. since i play on rocketeer sometimes, i use it 0 times. he is actually don't have ability.

actually, vanguard turret-mode probably are most worse turret-mode in game! because nubs start think, that this turret is very cool and imba. and it is VERY effective if you play with nubs. but than this player goes to normal match, and he is just useless nub who always crawl in turret, and he not understand why he is die every time, he is so stronk! how it was happend?.
it is super-bad. just because turret mode exist. turret mode ability literally makes some of new players play like an stupid idiots and don't teach how they should play in this game.

[DerMax]

Wait, Dermax, so are you saying that we should not make AC universal because it is a noob trap? That we should remove it because it is a noob trap? You seem to suggest that it becomes less useful in high tier lobbies, but in my mind that is not at all an argument against AC's implementation.

 

Tangentially, I fairly sure butt hit 2600 mmr in a ground scout before he found Brawler Jesus.

I don't know what I want, because I don't know what'd happen if AD in its current form became universal. In my mind, bad things would happen, especially in lower-tier lobbies. And I still don't like the momentum nullification thingy aesthetically.

 

And, frankly, it is not exactly a noob trap. I remember vividly Jeff and Xacius doing this air dance in zerkers back when they played. They just dodged right-and-left in symmetry until Jeff exploded. Looked dumb.

[TheButtSatisfier]

actually, vanguard turret-mode probably are most worse turret-mode in game! because nubs start think, that this turret is very cool and imba. and it is VERY effective if you play with nubs. but than this player goes to normal match, and he is just useless nub who always crawl in turret, and he not understand why he is die every time, he is so stronk! how it was happend?.
it is super-bad. just because turret mode exist. turret mode ability literally makes some of new players play like an stupid idiots and don't teach how they should play in this game.

 

While I agree that turret mode is imbalanced for many of the mechs they're equipped on, I'd say the Vanguard turret mode has the most utility out of all the turret modes. I say that because a turreted Vanguard sitting atop an orb can withstand a surprising amount of punishment, and many times you have to have the presence of mind to just ignore the turreted orb-Vanguard if you don't have the DPS or EMPs to make a go at it.

 

Without the orb, I agree that the Vanguard's turret mode is pretty ineffective. But that single orb can change a lot.

Edited by TheButtSatisfier, 31 October 2016 - 09:53 AM.

[Tom_Neverwinter]

I'm really feeling the dev. feedback we are getting. can we have a official dev. tip account for coffee and snacks? Heck I'll subscribe to donate monthly if information flows like this more often.

[StubbornPuppet]

I'll also jump in on the Turret Mode conversation.

The first thing I want to say is that "Turret Mode" should N.O.T. count as a "special ability". C-Class mechs should have a unique special ability AND turret mode.
I've never found a single shred of evidence that having turret mode available provides any benefit that outweighs standing in 'regular' mode. In fact, I'd argue that turret mode is actually a big deficit in most cases - as in it's almost a death-sentence unless you have dedicated support from your team and are in the right place. The benefits of using it are instantly nullified by the tremendous lack in mobility and lengthy transition.

I would suggest that turret mode be improved by a faster transition and improved rotation speed. These things were "overlooked" when Adhesive increased movement speed and decreased TTK - making a mechanic that was already difficult to use almost completely useless.