Thoughts regarding movement

[Tempest]

I seem to be running into discussions/suggestions regarding player movement more and more so I've decided to create a thread solely dedicated to it. Given that there's basically been no variation from base movement aside from class-specific modifiers and class specials that affect either the speed of the player or involve some kind of displacement (Dash/Rolls/Wook rage/barge mainly), I think that it's been one of the more subtle parts of MB2 and gone unexamined.

That said, the most consistently observed/mentioned issues arise from a similar source: Strafing. Whether it's the speeds of Jedi/Sith making it nearly unrealistic/unreliable to accurately hit them, dueling and having someone being able to zig-zag at max speeds in any direction at any given time, or some classes simply being at a massive disadvantage compared to others because they're slower by a large enough margin that they can't avoid shots while the others they're they're spray n' praying at the ones they're duking it out with and hoping they land the shots (because the enemy can stafe back and forth fast enough that you basically have to hope you'll hit them). That's not to say there's no skill in the maneuvering/gunning/whatever by default but anyone that says that there's no element of the above consistently present probably hasn't been paying much attention, IMO.

I'm not proposing to make every class the same speed or reduce strafe speeds to snail-pace or anything like that. I'm mostly just curious about the thoughts of the community, whether regarding what I mentioned above or anything related and suggestions they have for addressing them (assuming they see/find any problems with what I've said or other things that get brought up). I do also know that a lot of what I've described relates to what gives MB2 a lot of its addictive flavor and I don't want to take away from what makes it entertaining at its core if it's avoidable. Will be interesting to see where things go with this in any case.

 

[MaceMadunusus]

Prediction is another form of luck. That is why prediction-based players never win tournaments.

And that... is where you are wrong. The entirety of MOBA based tournaments (the biggest money makers) right now are 50-75% prediction based. Knowing what your enemy is doing, where they are moving. Without the ability to predict you are dead and you have lost. You predict wrong, you missed simple as that. It isn't luck at all. Did you zig instead of zag? etc etc.

 

[StarWarsGeek]

You know what else involves "luck"? Weapon shot spread. If you want to remove "luck" from the game, you need to make all weapons fire 100% accurately all the time, and be hitscan too. Prediction is a skill, not "luck", and it's a good thing to have in a game. It helps keep the game fresh and interesting, otherwise people would just find an optimal strategy and it would play out the same way every single time.

Luck is flipping a coin or rolling a die. Prediction involves a lot more than that. Yes, there is some probability involved, but everything in life involves some degree of probability. Even turn based strategic games like chess involve some prediction, since chess still hasn't been solved and it's impossible to run through every scenario in one's head.

 

[{Δ} Achilles]

You know what else involves "luck"? Weapon shot spread. If you want to remove "luck" from the game, you need to make all weapons fire 100% accurately all the time, and be hitscan too. Prediction is a skill, not "luck", and it's a good thing to have in a game. It helps keep the game fresh and interesting, otherwise people would just find an optimal strategy and it would play out the same way every single time.

Luck is flipping a coin or rolling a die. Prediction involves a lot more than that. Yes, there is some probability involved, but everything in life involves some degree of probability. Even turn based strategic games like chess involve some prediction, since chess still hasn't been solved and it's impossible to run through every scenario in one's head.

Some luck? Fine.

Mostly luck? Bad.

MB2 plays out like a low level game of hearthstone half the time, with the stackers having the winning hand fairly consistently. You people like to put words in my mouth, as though I'm 'All or nothing' in regards to these subjects, when you of all people should know better. I want to improve the game to be LESS luck based.

You can take any good gunner in the entire game, and pit them against me in a 1v1 Sold vs Sold, and it'll come down to basically 50/50 every damned time. Not because I'm good, not because they're bad, but because the strafe matches are literally just a god damned guessing game, where aim and skill means damned near nothing. That isn't good game design, no matter how much you think 'prediction is a skill'

 

[Liniyka_xddd]

Some luck? Fine.

Mostly luck? Bad.

MB2 plays out like a low level game of hearthstone half the time, with the stackers having the winning hand fairly consistently. You people like to put words in my mouth, as though I'm 'All or nothing' in regards to these subjects, when you of all people should know better. I want to improve the game to be LESS luck based.

You can take any good gunner in the entire game, and pit them against me in a 1v1 Sold vs Sold, and it'll come down to basically 50/50 every damned time. Not because I'm good, not because they're bad, but because the strafe matches are literally just a god damned guessing game, where aim and skill means damned near nothing. That isn't good game design, no matter how much you think 'prediction is a skill'

This is just straight up not true. A better gunner will wreck you. "Aim and skill means near nothing" - really? Okay, might as well just smash my head against my keyboard and wiggle my mouse randomly. I'll still get kills because it's all random, right?

Freaking wrong. You know what "prediction" is, by the way? It's a skill that everyone calls AIM. It's just that in games like CS you aim directly at your target, and in mb2 you need to lead ahead. But it's all the same. And aim makes a huge difference, no matter what you say.

 

[BigBossBigTeef]

Some luck? Fine.

Mostly luck? Bad.

MB2 plays out like a low level game of hearthstone half the time, with the stackers having the winning hand fairly consistently. You people like to put words in my mouth, as though I'm 'All or nothing' in regards to these subjects, when you of all people should know better. I want to improve the game to be LESS luck based.

You can take any good gunner in the entire game, and pit them against me in a 1v1 Sold vs Sold, and it'll come down to basically 50/50 every damned time. Not because I'm good, not because they're bad, but because the strafe matches are literally just a god damned guessing game, where aim and skill means damned near nothing. That isn't good game design, no matter how much you think 'prediction is a skill'

If its 50 50 chance, how come I loose all my shoot outs against anyone good?

50 to 50 chance implys I would win. Except I have lost all my firefights against good players who are recognizable. So its not 50 to 50% chance of winning.
It's almost as if you have no idea what the hell you are talking about and just look at gameplay footage or something.

 

[{Δ} Achilles]

This is just straight up not true. A better gunner will wreck you. "Aim and skill means near nothing" - really? Okay, might as well just smash my head against my keyboard and wiggle my mouse randomly. I'll still get kills because it's all random, right?

Freaking wrong. You know what "prediction" is, by the way? It's a skill that everyone calls AIM. It's just that in games like CS you aim directly at your target, and in mb2 you need to lead ahead. But it's all the same. And aim makes a huge difference, no matter what you say.

Prediction isn't aim. If you need to lead your opponent by such huge margins as there are in MB2, it becomes luck, because whether you hit the opponent or not, becomes THEIR choice, not yours. They determine if you hit them or not, because it exclusively depends on whether they go along with your 'prediction' or not. I have fought some of the best gunners in this game, like Hexodious, and in my experience, it mostly boils down to luck, rather than skill. I've seen him go 0/10, I've seen him go 15/0, I've seen teams stomp him, and I've seen him die to not-so-good gunners, even though I know he is better.

Your first statement was supposed to be a joke, but in many cases it is actually true. I know of several gunners that actively do just that, shake their cameras wildly while holding the fire button, AI Goliath is one of those players, if you ever watch him he doesn't aim. Infact, one of my favorite strategies with the E-11 is to just not aim at all, but to draw a 'circle' around the target with my crosshair, and just fully embrace luck. I'll typically land more shots by just mindlessly spraying and focusing on my A/D/A/D movement, than I will by trying to actively aim at them.

Now, there is hitscan, which is completely dependent on aim, and has very little input on the defender. There is semi-hitscan, which is basically a weird mix that games like Battlefield/Battlefront have, and is MOSTLY on the side of the person aiming, but can be dodged to a minor extent by the defender. Then there are varying speeds inbetween, leading to MB2's projectile speeds.

Now, MB2's projectile speeds are actually pretty impossible to dodge on reaction, they're actually quite fast (Could be faster though). The whole tap dodge button to dodge thing didn't work, because you can't actually see the projectiles before it is too late. The thing that makes gun v gun and gun v saber take so little skill on both sides, are two factors:

A) Movement speed - The fact of the matter is, it is 15x easier to hit an SBD or a Soldier than it is a hero exclusively due to movement speed. The faster your character is, the harder it becomes to consistently hit them. Now the problem with this is, the hero isn't dodging or dashing your shots on reaction, infact they're basically not even looking at your shots, they just have these built in strafe patterns that give them success based upon where they *think* you will be aiming. If you don't think about where you're aiming and just spray in a general area, then you'll have more success in my experience.

B) Weapon inconsistencies - The Weapons all have different fire-rates and very different accuracies, this basically means that some guns require more aim than others. Weapons like Pistol are more skill-based, whereas weapons like Clone rifle require nearly none at all. That is because the projectile from a P3 moves far faster and more accurately than the projectiles from a Clone rifle, and the fact that Clone rifle fires so much faster basically indicates that the weapon isn't about aim at all. At a certain point people must realize, either sub-consciously or consciously, that the faster the fire rate -> the more forgiving the weapon is. CR2-3, SBD FP 3, E-11 alt fire, these weapons are all more forgiving, because they constantly give you more chances to miss and still hit anyway. However, Arc-5 has a faster fire rate yet is not very forgiving due to the high accuracy and lower damage, to its own detriment.

Basically, most of MB2 is a spray 'n pray, and I believe it should be fixed.

 

[T r i s t a n]

Me to this thread x2:

 

[Chaos the Chaotic]

Bullshit.

Spray and Pray is true to a degree, a degree that is irrelevant to people that know how, where and when to aim.


Hmmmmm, maybe I need to start playing more again to see who the fuck this fucker is.

 

[{Δ} Achilles]

Bullshit.

Spray and Pray is true to a degree, a degree that is irrelevant to people that know how, where and when to aim.


Hmmmmm, maybe I need to start playing more again to see who the F**k this fucker is.

I guarantee you, that even the best gunner in the entire game, still has to bow his head to a large degree of luck in gun v gun play, with the exception of long-range.

 

[Chaos the Chaotic]

No.

Take your garbage and spew it to someone else.

Here's reality. Even with strafing lke a loon, Reaction Time + Accuracy + knowing where to shoot = Win.

But hey, what do I know. Haha.I must have been one lucky fucking bastard for the last decade lol.

GG.

 

[andrew]

Prediction is another form of luck. That is why prediction-based players never win tournaments.

not sure why anyone would respond seriously to achilles

as if everyones going to suddenly forget that every godlike gunner is insanely consistent in how well they perform

 

[{Δ} Achilles]

not sure why anyone would respond seriously to achilles

as if everyones going to suddenly forget that every godlike gunner is insanely consistent in how well they perform

Slips vs Perfect Legend. Scorpion is very much so a 'luck' based character in many respects, as he has a 'vortex' which allows the player to constantly reset the opponent, and go for a 50/50 mixup. The problem? It isn't consistent. The thing that decides this match, are their skilled usages of anti-airs, pokes, and punishments, less so the luck although that does play a factor.

At most, a lucky hit will give Scorpion 10%, and potentially lead into another lucky 50/50 mixup possibility, but it won't WIN him the match. If anything, Slips reliance on mixups/luck is what got him the loss.



Infact, the only fighting game I know of where a heavily mix-up based player won a tournament, is SCV with OmegaDR... and that is really only because Nightmare (and a few other characters) have safe-on-block 50/50s.

 

[Rajive]

If prediction is really a form of luck. Then explain to me how can some players perform something like 98% hit with projectile rifle/disruptor in main ? And how can the same players, each time I meet then in E-11 vs E-11 beat me and almost everyone in the team ? I mean just watch how Gumba plays as gunner and tell me he's just lucky. Same goes for Qwerty even if he's not playing that much anymore. They are not lucky, but highly skilled.

 

[{Δ} Achilles]

If prediction is really a form of luck. Then explain to me how can some players perform something like 98% hit with projectile rifle/disruptor in main ? And how can the same players, each time I meet then in E-11 vs E-11 beat me and almost everyone in the team ? I mean just watch how Gumba plays as gunner and tell me he's just lucky. Same goes for Qwerty even if he's not playing that much anymore. They are not lucky, but highly skilled.

Because it isn't 100% luck, there is just a huge amount of it. Mastery over MB2's gimmicks, and specific tactics, grants a more experienced player infinitely more options than a not-so-good player.

 

[BigBossBigTeef]

You used MXK as an example against Street fighter, a game that has a game mode called "test your luck".
A series that has consistently used RNG as means of balancing characters.

Where street fighter has never used that at all and rewards you for being able to predict people.
Which is not luck. It's called doing your homework and understanding frame data. What a person can or can't do with the mechanics givin in a certain circumstance. Street fighter has always had definite answers while MKX throws pies into professional faces as means of keeping things fresh.

MKX is a very poor example to use, I would of laughed you out the door if you used Tekkan as an example.
You haven't proven that the game is at all luck. If there was luck, luck would imply I have a percentage to win fights.
You ignored my argument of having a 100% consistency of being killed by better players than me.

It's not because im unlucky, its because im shit at the game.
Stop creating excuses for you and people who cant figure out how to get good, you are actively putting thoughts into peoples heads and forgoing their responsibility in practicing. You are rewarding people who want to bitch and cry about the game, than spend their time getting better.

 

[{Δ} Achilles]

You used MXK as an example against Street fighter, a game that has a game mode called "test your luck".
A series that has consistently used RNG as means of balancing characters.

Where street fighter has never used that at all and rewards you for being able to predict people.
Which is not luck. It's called doing your homework and understanding frame data. What a person can or can't do with the mechanics givin in a certain circumstance. Street fighter has always had definite answers while MKX throws pies into professional faces as means of keeping things fresh.

MKX is a very poor example to use, I would of laughed you out the door if you used Tekkan as an example.
You haven't proven that the game is at all luck. If there was luck, luck would imply I have a percentage to win fights.
You ignored my argument of having a 100% consistency of being killed by better players than me.

It's not because im unlucky, its because im shit at the game.
Stop creating excuses for you and people who cant figure out how to get good, you are actively putting thoughts into peoples heads and forgoing their responsibility in practicing. You are rewarding people who want to bitch and cry about the game, than spend their time getting better.

You've basically just discredited yourself here. I wasn't referring to MKX, I was referring to MK9. I haven't even played MKX. Also, 'Test Your Luck' is just a parlor slot machine game that causes random events to happen during your game, and has no bearing on an actual match.

Street Fighter has luck involved, all fighting games do, but they are minimized heavily by actual mechanics.

Yes, you're bad at the game, so some players will 100% dominate you. However, that doesn't disregard the fact that there is enormous amounts of luck within the game. Just because you suck, doesn't mean other people do. What do you think determines when a good player goes up against another good player in MB2? Luck.

 

[BigBossBigTeef]

Yes, you're bad at the game, so some players will 100% dominate you. However, that doesn't disregard the fact that there is enormous amounts of luck within the game. Just because you suck, doesn't mean other people do. What do you think determines when a good player goes up against another good player in MB2? Luck.

You are still arguing with no evidence presented where mine has some semblance of having evidence.
Higher tier matches of good vs good is not 100% luck. You haven't proven this, you keep pretending you have but you have not presented 100% fact that is the case. You just create scenarios or reference memories of fights, when memories are only as good as the amount of the attention span that was engaged during it.

Where lets say Good old ben can just post a demo proving this point. Which is objective information that everyone can observe. Where your evidence is subjective and entirely based on past experiences and what you are preconceiving as information. Have you considered the information you got to form these opinions is wrong? Because I fucking question every single detail in my life before I accept them as being correct.

Have you done your homework in-order to show your work?

Also, every fucking time I open my mouth I am discrediting myself. Because I am retarded and autistic.
(not medically diagnosed but would not be surprised if I was.)

I never enjoyed mortal combat so yes I am going to confuse the games, because mortal combat has always been too fucking clown shoes to enjoy for me when I played games like virtua fighter. Where that game is a 3 button fighter and somehow is the most complex and depthful game which worked against it. Because its too fucking hard for people to learn, and fighters live or die by their communities.

 

[andrew]

any fighting game that has a character with an invincible dp is 100% luck based by your standards, so i dont know why you even engaged with me when it comes to fighting games

if every single button you can press on wakeup, their wakeup, or within range of their dp can be dped theres obviously no skill involved right? daigo throwing that guy 5 times in a row was purely luck, right?

the moment you called mb2 movement luck based you immediately surrendered yourself to the complete scrub mentality, and anything you post on this subject should be disregarded. you clearly dont understand the decision making that goes into the game

 

[BigBossBigTeef]

any fighting game that has a character with an invincible dp is 100% luck based by your standards, so i dont know why you even engaged with me when it comes to fighting games

if every single button you can press on wakeup, their wakeup, or within range of their dp can be dped theres obviously no skill involved right? daigo throwing that guy 5 times in a row was purely luck, right?

the moment you called mb2 movement luck based you immediately surrendered yourself to the complete scrub mentality, and anything you post on this subject should be disregarded. you clearly dont understand the decision making that goes into the game

I hate that we need to have this discussion on it, but we need to do our part and debunk the nonsense. There are people who have learned wrong because a teacher was not present, or somebody to guide them. These long paragraphs and discussions need to happen because achilles may not be the only person who has this mindset. This is for the community, this for the people who slam their hands against their desk in frustration and just don't get it.
We need to be there for them and show them how, shaking our heads and just dismissing them is just going to let this mentality grow.

And the best way to prove things is with objective information being provided instead of subjective which can be skewed to fit the argument of the creator. It's annoying, its frustrating, but we have to do this so one day the game isn't drastically changed because of a simple idea. We need to have this talk no matter how retarded it is.

This how we got flinch into the game. By having 30 pages of people having a discussion on finding a middle ground between gunners and sabers. By providing objective factual information and showing the disparity. Good god, the headaches I got from repeating myself still remain fresh.

 

[andrew]

what is there to debunk when someone calls movement in a quake-like luck based?

that's not something that was learned wrong, or failed to be taught. that's a fundamentally different viewpoint that should be disregarded

21 years of arcade fps gameplay has established itself solidly enough to not need salt about it being debunked