The next steps forward

Hey everyone. I know that a lot of were expecting changes for the current state of saber v gunner and/or saber v saber in this patch but I assure you, things are still in motion to get those settled and pushed out!

As a preface, MB2 has had a theme of changing things for the sake of changing or trying to address problems in really weird/roundabout ways and not actually solving the issues. This leads/has led to problems not actually being solved and/or creating new ones (although there's been a lot of cool stuff along the way). Moving forward, there's going to be more focus on adjusting things to being able to have more static baselines (e.g. there shouldn't be any major overhauls to saber v gunner interactions once all of this stuff is sorted out) or prepping for future changes, whether completely new features or more intricate adjustments to current ones.

We want to make the game feel more dynamic, volatile, exciting, and of course, fun. That is the main focus of these changes for the next patch as well as the long term goal for MB2 overall.

That said, some time in the following days, we are going to set up an open beta for testing the adjustments to saber v gunner. This will likely involve reconfiguring one of the official servers with the new changes (no messing with files for anyone who wants to try them out!), having a channel on the official discord dedicated to discussions, as well as scheduled times for when devs/beta testers will be around to observe/gather feedback firsthand during gameplay.

Things that will be different and that will be closely looked at include (but aren't limited to) the following:

• No more flinch
• No more FP regen debuff
• Increased knockback against saberists
• Jedi/Sith only having damage reduction in specific circumstances (not universally)
• Changes to caps on FP drains (especially for blocking)
• Tweaks to Pistol/Bowcaster charged damage
• Ammo changes for the Projectile Rifle
• Adjustments to projectile speeds

There's more but those are the main points of interest for gameplay changes. Additionally, what's listed in the final changelog that will be included with the open beta is not the extent of what's being looked at. This is just what's been fully agreed on, vetted, and implemented.

I'm also hoping that more transparency on what's being worked on as well as why will help improve community relations in the long run and make it easier for both those working on the mod as well as those waiting for new toys/features/etc. On that note, for those still wondering about the saber system changes, we're still working on figuring out the details since those aren't purely server-side adjustments. Stay tuned for more info!

 

[MaceMadunusus]

The T junction I feel though is a little confusing and odd to navigate. I prefer the old t junction myself, it was a simple route and everyone KNEW where to go. Also, there is rarely any combat at all in the replacements for side. They look amazing visually, but gameplay, eh..

That was the change I was talking about doing next. Redoing T-Junc and the side routes again. It is also why I am doing it last as its the most extensive change. Though it might have to wait until after you know what. People like Mark make me not want to even bother though because I am taking feedback and just because I am not doing exactly what he wants, how he wants, when he wants, i get attacked for it. Guess what, people like that also make me not want to bring the classic version back when I am done doing everything I want to do. So yeah, keep chugging along accusing me of not listening. That is totally going to get you what you want.

But now I feel there's just so many ways to get to throne and it's so open, it's just not as concentrated and epic as it used to be. That's just my opinion of course.

While I agree, that was also part of the intent. Old version was way too easy to defend and balcony route was added as a bandaid fix. I want imperials to actually have to try, communicate, and pay attention to defend the objective now, rather than just being a mindless chokepoint with a stupidly easily defendable hack that it was before. First iteration went too much in the opposite direction. Which led us to where we are now, and I am generally pretty happy with the current version. Just some bug fixes and improvements need to be done to the actual capture node itself. Then I will be very happy with it.

Perhaps I should have mentioned all of this earlier in testing, but it's only when you play on public servers you really notice the changes.

Exactly part of the point I am trying to make. Some of the issues were not apparent at all in our limited beta sessions and there is only so much theorizing you can do. It is why I needed the input and play time from the community. We weren't capable of doing an open beta that requires client changes at that time, and we still aren't.

I was listening to E3 yesterday and noticed that Wookies fire green bolts with their Bowcasters, simple as that.

This was the plan years ago with the FX file reorganize/minor optimizations made. Change Bowcaster 1 and 2 to green. 3 to red. (Chewies bowcaster is red, while wookiees in EP3 are green). Required some code changes I wasn't capable of doing, and I guess no one got around to it. I have kept bringing it up several times now though along with a couple other things that need doing FX wise.

 

[Chocorope]

Very nice MaceMadunusus! Hope yall get this worked on and polished for the grand day!

But I'm curious what is your oppinion about my ForceDisarm stuff? Is it codable for MB2? Do you think it sound interesting?? Or you cant quite answer that due to it being more part of the gameplay direction sector? If so, who can I tag to get an oppinion?

I'd really like to have an opinion from you Devs about this particular idea as I feel it would be a catastrophe not trying adding it in some ways, or even considering about it to the very least.

 

[MaceMadunusus]

But I'm curious what is your oppinion about my ForceDisarm stuff? Is it codable for MB2? Do you think it sound interesting?? Or you cant quite answer that due to it being more part of the gameplay direction sector? If so, who can I tag to get an oppinion?.

Im fairly indifferent about it. Could be an interesting addition to force whore only builds. But I think some of the potential things I and others want to do are a bit more interesting. I don't think it would be difficult to code either.

 

[Chocorope]

Im fairly indifferent about it. Could be an interesting addition to force whore only builds. But I think some of the potential things I and others want to do are a bit more interesting. I don't think it would be difficult to code either.

Alrigthy thanks alot buddy! Appreciate your honesty.

I'ma add it to my diary eventually

But now... You made me curious about what you guys have in mind!!!...

...

Huarrgggggggggggh

 

[MuscBodypillow]

Very nice MaceMadunusus! Hope yall get this worked on and polished for the grand day!

But I'm curious what is your oppinion about my ForceDisarm stuff? Is it codable for MB2? Do you think it sound interesting?? Or you cant quite answer that due to it being more part of the gameplay direction sector? If so, who can I tag to get an oppinion?

I'd really like to have an opinion from you Devs about this particular idea as I feel it would be a catastrophe not trying adding it in some ways, or even considering about it to the very least.

Lightning disarm would be too OP, lightning already negate gunners, mass disarming would be too OP. usually force build rely on the mass push or lightning push, this would make lightning push have 0 counter.

 

[Chocorope]

Lightning disarm would be too OP, lightning already negate gunners, mass disarming would be too OP. usually force build rely on the mass push or lightning push, this would make lightning push have 0 counter.

Thats not how I had it in mind! Go read my post on the precious page.

Huarrgh now peoples will have it wrong, i'ma repost it here to be certain no confusions is created

There's also a scene Sidious disarm Yoda with a powerful force lightning blow, could it be implemented? It sounds interesting for force whores like Rosh+ and such.

L3 & P3 on Force focus without enemy holding block, swing blocking, low on BP and or FP?

It look and sound interesting for force whores since they're often out of option agaisnt sabers.

Greenbolts on bowcasters would be a great add-on to the fresh vibe I get from the changes you guys are heading for, while the second would be a great add-on to ForceWhores!

Adding an whole new level of deept to this gameplay, skills, make it more viable, tempting, accesible for people and.. lets be honest, It look cool hf.

If a Sith is good enough at dodging sabers, he could jump around and make opponent loose enough focus, fp and bp to land a Force Disarm, then shock it to death.

 

[MuscBodypillow]

Thats not how I had it in mind! Go read my post on the precious page.

Huarrgh now peoples will have it wrong, i'ma repost it here to be certain no confusions is created

I mean, if you can force focus the target must be quite still or not move much. if the target is not holding block they are either afk, memeing or unaware of you. The only way this would work is to hide and surprise people after they just finished a combat to disarm them. If you can sneak on them and get force focus, just swing once and it's over.

 

[Chocorope]

Concerning ForceFocus, I disagree, most people go forward while chasing you, and while you back pedal, aiming at the target, it can activate quite quick enough!

If they jump too much while chasing you, or fail push or what not, again, it'll make your life quite easy on that matter.

Now It is true most people wont just stand there and not holding block (unless they abuse taunts while underestimating you)

But my idea of ForceDisarm aint based on only that, but from a series of good decision to deeplet enemy from both FP, maybe BP and the fact that people cant swing block all of their swings.

If you're good at dodging and jumping, you can deeplet enemy from FP and BP, and while he get greedy chasing you, chance is he wont be SwingBlocking... because at this point, hes just so greedy to kill you!

I think it would be fair to give them a ForceDisarm possibility from all of this.

We could add another and last rule into which after all of this, ForceWhores also need to ForceFocus, tho that might make it abit too tricky to be enjoyable and viable.

Look at how Yoda carelessly jump at him, underestimating Sidious after their ForceBattle! Also then by not being carefull enough on his Block (BP) + FP deepled, there goes the saber...

 

[Chocorope]

And yes, that totally does mean the Dark Lord could wait for you to deplete yourself from a battle, but that my good sir... Is a strategic move!

If you have a friend around, you should be fine! If not, you backpedal a bit to gain back some strength.

Notice how Yoda doesn't have a friend here to help him. With another saber around, Sidious would have to play differently.

 

[iOstrava]

Sounds interesting

 

[Onysfx]

@|CB|Lyrion

I definitely agree and think this idea should be implemented. It wouldn't be OP at all, trying to get force focus as a forcewhore on a jedi is down right dangerous (well if you're alone that is), you should be rewarded if you are able to.

 

[President Bossk]

Comm tower classic, jedi temple classic, tantive classic, etc were all not immediately added after their respective changes and there was no uproar. The same policy that applied then, applies now. But somehow now its criticized as being a tantrum throwing move by ignorant community members even though we have always done this process. There are also some maps we never added a classic version back for, because the new one surpassed the old.

There is nothing hard about adding the old dotf back. This is just the process we have always done, and will continue to do for map revamps.

Edit: I would also like to note, this plan went back almost 9 years ago back when I only had the initial main hallway somewhat finished. Where Acidus was still a part of the team and was vehemently against the idea of redoing and replacing DOTF. This whole idea or process isn't something new. Has been the plan for years, and has been the case on other level revamps.

First off, new comm tower to old comm tower isn't as different as new DOTF vs old DOTF. Secondly, people agreed on those that the new version is better. A lot of people don't think that on new DOTF. I think what really makes it worse, is the removal of the unique objective of the old one, that was really fun to play, and replacing it with a broken and not very fun one.

 

[QuoVadis?]

so maybe if you got all those people who were complaining about new DOTF to come to the forums and express their opinion constructively

This is exactly why i've come to the forums. A lot of folks complain(in a destructive manner) about what they don't like. Then fail to do anything constructive to improve it. Voicing your opinions to developers shouldnt feel like youre arguing with a brick wall because im sure if you have something decent to say, they will listen. No developer would work on this mod for free so that people can come on here and complain about their work. Im sure they do it because they love this game and community and aim to do their best to provide the best experience.

 

[Chocorope]

@|CB|Lyrion

I definitely agree and think this idea should be implemented. It wouldn't be OP at all, trying to get force focus as a forcewhore on a jedi is down right dangerous (well if you're alone that is), you should be rewarded if you are able to.

I'M so happy you guys finally agree with one of my ideas/suggestion for this game! I got accustomed to getting blasted for anything I come with...

Hell, even a lot of changes I proposed for a long time (faster blaster bolts, lower Proj. ammos, slower blobs and a deeper deflection system) are all finally being applied to open after everyone keeps telling me to stfu about it and call me a retard for 3 years.

I'm really having a good week, thanks alot guys and devs as well! It's a huge victory for me and it as convinced me to keep posting my ideas and fighting for what I believe is right.

Thanks alot again for the support!

I'll try to fight hard to have this LigthingDisarm. stuff reaching the Devs.Council.

 

[MaceMadunusus]

First off, new comm tower to old comm tower isn't as different as new DOTF vs old DOTF. Secondly, people agreed on those that the new version is better.

Still missing the point about what I'm saying where having classic vs not having it doesn't include what the community thinks for the first little bit. Because they need a minimum few months to adjust to the map to give unbiased, non knee jerk reactions to something that had a previous revision.

DOTFs old objective is not unique at all. Most maps feature that same objective or something very similar. The new objective is actually unique. It is buggy yes but we are going to fix that.

Voicing your opinions to developers shouldnt feel like youre arguing with a brick wall because im sure if you have something decent to say, they will listen.

Yep. I even make it a personal rule to not ignore or block people to make sure I get as many opinions as possible even if I don't like them. I also never alias in game for the same reason. No one seems to care about how badly I want DOTF to be better than the old one. Nor do they care to work with me. Just saying my reasons are excuses, blah blah. I warned everyone ahead of time before DOTF even released, even YEARS before now that it would be overwriting the old DOTF and there would be no classic version, at least initially. And to be treated like this afterwards, is just unacceptable and very hurtful. I am trying really hard here to get improvements and things out to everyone. The most recent patch I spent the 3 days before hand with less than 4 hours a sleep each night just to keep working on things.

As a developer I will always end up doing things people don't like. I can't please everyone. However, people need to stop acting like this and I see it in more communities than just this one. And is exactly the reason I didn't respond to the topic when he first asked it. And because of assholes like him, I might never bother responding to it again.

 

[President Bossk]

It's not the obj itself that's unique Mace, it's what's surrounding the obj. The door and window were cool and fun. No offense, as a appreciate your work, but new command post style obj, while more balanced, isn't very fun.

 

[MaceMadunusus]

No offense, as a appreciate your work, but new command post style obj, while more balanced, isn't very fun.

The old one made me so angry to the point I would stop playing MB2. Being balanced is better.

 

[President Bossk]

The old one made me so angry to the point I would stop playing MB2. Being balanced is better.

Maybe to you Mace, and it's fine you feel that way. But most players, including myself, liked the door and window.

 

[MaceMadunusus]

Eh, every bit of play I have had around the new objective seems to make me pretty happy with my decision, even if its going against the grain of the community on that one. Balance is more important in many cases. It seems to be much better to play in and around in many respects with the recent changes. Once we remove the bugs and whatnot, it'll be perfect imo.

 

[Tasmann]

Seriously? Projectile rifle at ammo 3 is going to be reduced to 15? That's absurd. That's way too many points to invest for only 15 rounds. The projectile rifle is one of the most fun weapons to use. You're effectively making it no different from an E-33, and bounty hunters/heroes don't have a jetpack with which to get around. Why is this a change that's even happening?

Also, is there a clarification on this whole damage reduction only working in certain scenarios? Because if flinch is being completely removed, then so should damage reduction.

Also, is there a clarification on the projectile speed? Is that for projectile rifle or for all guns in general?