1263 replies to this topic

[SVK Puskin]

Koniving, on 24 June 2013 - 01:12 PM, said:

Your mech has a Gyro, you as the person do not so you should bob around.

If Mech has Gyro that means the pilot can sit without shaking ofcourse in combination with other things such as that helmet as you said, but i think you mean this: Right?

[Koniving]

ENS Puskin, on 24 June 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

If Mech has Gyro that means the pilot can sit without shaking ofcourse in combination with other things such as that helmet as you said, but i think you mean this: <Vid> Right?

If that were true, the mech would never shake, the mech would never bounce, etc. and the cockpits would be perfectly still. The gyro is a way to keep balance.

Gyros! Some of the most impressive gyros in the world can't keep a mech perfectly stationary and from the bouncing the MWO cockpits do, we should bounce a bit too. It'd reduce how accurate our weapons fire is.

But yes as in that video notice how they rattle around as they walk? Pretty much what I mean.

Btw, that video is a perfect representation of when you should "do something" instead of arguing -- poor girl. Her AMS could've easily taken out those two missiles it was practically an LRM-5.

Edited by Koniving, 24 June 2013 - 02:22 PM.

[stjobe]

Right.

1210 replies - most of them explaining in excruciating detail why the proposed idea is bad, bad, bad - and not a peep for two weeks from PGI.

Hello?! Are you there? What are you doing? Hello? Anyone home?

[Deadmeat313]

ENS Puskin, on 24 June 2013 - 12:04 PM, said:

Man, man, man! Mechs has Gyro cars doesn't...Do you know for what reason they have it?

The gyro and neurohelmet allow the Mech to use the pilot's inner ear for balance, so the Mech does not fall over.

It does not stop the cockpit from shaking.

The human body does a pretty good job of dampening vibration. Really when the mech jumps or runs, the cockpit (and the HUD) should shake, but the view outside would be steady.

[E_Crow]

DisasterMedic, on 11 June 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

I find it hilarious that :pgi: doesn't realize the only problem with non-energy weapons is that they are shackling themselves to stupid table top rules to satisfy a vocal minority of grognards instead of just making ballistic and missile weapons actually work.

But then again, that would make the game fun.

That is one of the stupider things that has been said on this topic. They are chaining themselves to the tabletop rules. If they didn't They might as well just update the Mechwarrior 4 graphics, smooth out those bugs, and call it good. (sarcasm) The ballistic weapons work well if you learn how to shoot them. Missiles they cant seem to make work right, and they really need to fix those. And clearly, you never really played the tabletop game, or you wouldn't be treating the rules with such contempt. They actually made ballistics easy to use compare to TT rules.

"But that would make the game fun". If its not fun, then why do you still play it? I know you do.

Edited by AstroTiki, 25 June 2013 - 09:07 AM.

[Necroconvict]

MangoBogadog, on 15 June 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:

Skimming through this it seems almost everyone agrees that 150% is too high. Im interested to see if these feedback threads get listened to.

Personally I think 120% would be much better.

Also, weapon boating design by chassis sounds way over complicated. would have been better to have just put in a proper hard point system where you can't put AC20's where machine guns were supposed to be or PPC's where medium lasers were meant.

Sure thing bud, just so long as we get a refund on all of our C-bills, and MC. That sounds great. We currently have mechs that we can alter the design of. With your suggestion, we would no longer be able to alter the design, you get what you buy... and nothing more. Most of us, probably wouldn't have bought any mechs though in that sort of a design. Many of the builds are terrible for actual online play, heck they aren't that great for tabletop either.

[Kraven Kor]

stjobe, on 24 June 2013 - 03:14 PM, said:

Right.

1210 replies - most of them explaining in excruciating detail why the proposed idea is bad, bad, bad - and not a peep for two weeks from PGI.

Hello?! Are you there? What are you doing? Hello? Anyone home?

They probably feel they have commented quite enough on the matter.

Again, at this point, all I want is to try to ensure they keep the 1PV queue separate as "promised."

[MangoBogadog]

Necroconvict, on 24 June 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

Sure thing bud, just so long as we get a refund on all of our C-bills, and MC. That sounds great. We currently have mechs that we can alter the design of. With your suggestion, we would no longer be able to alter the design, you get what you buy... and nothing more. Most of us, probably wouldn't have bought any mechs though in that sort of a design. Many of the builds are terrible for actual online play, heck they aren't that great for tabletop either.

You could alter mech designs in mw4 and they had exactly that hard point system.

[Reported for Inappropriate Name]

this new heat system to discourage high alpha boating is just going to make most of the competitive playerbase switch back to dual gauss if the dpm pans out to be greater than with ppc's due to the heat changes.

this in particular is why I've fallen back on an old favorite due to it being much cheaper to elite as well as its effectiveness (good work on the cosmetics for the K2 by the way), I'm going to try something different, as modules aren't that important on a sniper, I'll be playing the with the concept of loading up on artillery and airstrikes. Although I certainly hope an autoresupply feature is coming.

Edited by Battlecruiser, 24 June 2013 - 07:41 PM.

[Taxxian]

Maybe all this has been said already, I post it nonetheless:

Heat Penalty:

- not addressing the real Problem
- Mechs have lots of stats not shown in the game, we allready need to use Smurfy to know all about the Mech we want to buy (number of launchtubes, maximum speed, +40% HS that are called DOUBLE) you are going to generate a completely new illogical and counter intuitive stat

Pulse Laseres:

- look at your Statistics! Who actually uses them? So why make the big ones even worse? Makes no sense at all... Give them less Alpha, more DPS and more heat efficiency and look how far you have to go in that direction!


Your Problems seems to be High-Alpha Builds! So why dont you simply make heat efficient high DPS small Alpha Weapons more viable? Turning Pulse Lasers into such a Weapon looks like a fine Idea to me...

You could also remove the "no min range" rule from the ER-PPC, forcing players to build in some other weapons at least...

Sugestions:

- stick with the stats we have, dont invent new stuff
- improve brawling by improving brawler weapons, a 6 ppc stalker shoud be dangerous at 500m, not so at 50m
- give us collisions back

[Asmosis]

Milt, on 24 June 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:

yes, i know about the 4singles but as i said, practically nonexistent. now after reading the TT rules(which i havent done in 20yrs) i find that they only allowed 6 pts of heat dissipation. for some reason i remembered at being more. damn it sux getting old.

light mechs should get this automatically, since often the entire mech is underwater. some areas on river city if you power down in a commando (probably other mechs) you are entirely underwater and invisible to anyone without bap, or who happens to also be a light mech going swimming nearby.

[MustrumRidcully]

Basically, what we want is to stop people from firing multiple weapons together so they benefit from convergence and all hit the same spot, something that people using mixed weapons can't do because their weapons have different lead times or other differing behavior. Right?

So, why not stop people from firing multiple weapons all together?

Nothing too complicated. Remove group-fire, and force a mandatory 0.25 to 0.5 second global cooldown after every shot. If you press the Alpha Strike, you just fire all guns one after another with the 0.25 second delay. It's close enough, a table top alpha strike is performed over a 10 second turn, after all.

That's where you want to go. Boating 8 MLs is not anyway near as powerful as boating 2 AC/20s, but then, 2 AC/20s are a lot heavier than 8 MLs. But mixing MLs and AC/20s - would you do that if you had the choice between just boating one of these weapons? If you wanted to be competitive and have the best possible build?

You probably would not. Delivering highly precise alpha strikes with a single shot is better than spreading damage around.


And you probably do not really want to mess with convergence. Or add complicated subsystems like targeting computers. Or figure out a way to communicate arbitrary heat penalties for group firing to the player.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 25 June 2013 - 04:47 AM.

[SVK Puskin]

Koniving, on 24 June 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

If that were true, the mech would never shake, the mech would never bounce, etc. and the cockpits would be perfectly still. The gyro is a way to keep balance.

Gyros! Some of the most impressive gyros in the world can't keep a mech perfectly stationary and from the bouncing the MWO cockpits do, we should bounce a bit too. It'd reduce how accurate our weapons fire is.

But yes as in that video notice how they rattle around as they walk? Pretty much what I mean.

Btw, that video is a perfect representation of when you should "do something" instead of arguing -- poor girl. Her AMS could've easily taken out those two missiles it was practically an LRM-5.

Ok i have no problem with that if they decide to add this into the game, but for some players basicly new players it would be only harder and as you know they working on 3rd person view so maybe this shaking ability should be able only for hardcore players.

Edited by ENS Puskin, 27 June 2013 - 11:11 AM.

[Koniving]

Perhaps. In the meantime I was digging up old videos and I came across something from the land before time, where Armlock didn't exist. I watched my aim. I watched what was required to get precise aiming. And I watched how terrible the twin PPC + gauss combo was at the time and I thought to myself -- this is freaking genius!

Easiest solution to all of our problems is remove armlock! Enjoy the vid (p.s. the PPC/gauss guy died before the starting point of this time-skipped link. It was that pathetic at the time. Watch my aim!)

[Teralitha]

Side Step, on 20 June 2013 - 06:01 AM, said:

How are you going to communicate a system like this to the average player? Is this something only forum warriors will know?

While I appreciate what you're trying to do; heat scale is not the way to do it.
The whole system seems arbitrary and clunky. It's a much too complex way of balancing weapons. A system which doesn't even take into consideration high alpha builds using a mix of weapon types, or weapon types that generate low amounts of heat for it's high damage.

The system also promotes macroing to time shots.

This will not magically solve anything. It'll just make the on-going balancing act a much more convoluted and difficult process down the road.

Right. so.... remove double heat sinks then? I thought so.

stjobe, on 24 June 2013 - 03:14 PM, said:

Right.

1210 replies - most of them explaining in excruciating detail why the proposed idea is bad, bad, bad - and not a peep for two weeks from PGI.

Hello?! Are you there? What are you doing? Hello? Anyone home?

What do you think they are doing? Ignoring us and going ahead with their bad ideas, while thinking up more of them.

[Koniving]

Teralitha, on 25 June 2013 - 07:19 AM, said:

Right. so.... remove double heat sinks then? I thought so.

I had a better one than that. Check out the second link in my signature to find the page.

Or the short-hand version here with the medium-hand explanation one of my posts above it (with the pictures).

It's not remove double heatsinks, it's remove the fact that they raise your threshold to numbers as high as 110 when 10 standards only give you 30. Not only do they cool faster, but they allow you to have an insanely high heat cap.
So if we remove that erroneous and abuse-worthy concept that they raise our maximum heat, and preset it to something like 60 to 63:

• we then have everyone able to do only one to two alpha strikes (small weapons) without shutting down.
  
• More space between attacks.
  
• And to counter this more people will use chain fire.
  
• Buffs lights and mediums whose heat cap could never reach that without dropping virtually all of its weapons.
  
• Nerfs the alpha striking ability of the assaults and heavies as all mechs would have the same heat thresholds (we can say it's an engine limitation or something for fluff), thus removing them as the only viable mechs for more dynamic gameplay.
  
• Assaults and heavies would still be able to fire more often than lights and mediums since double heatsinks would then have true 2x cooling to bring the heat down faster. The key, though, is they can't alpha strike more.
  
• An alpha strike with 6 ER PPCs at 63 heat would instantly shut down the mech, which would then have to wait until it's heat is half way down bare minimum before firing again at a high risk of self-destructing.
  
• Typical gauss + PPC builds would still be viable (addressed further down) but would not be able to fire so frequently.
  
• Heat management would matter once again to everyone.
  
• We'd be luke warm again on cold maps.
  
• Hot on normal maps.
  
• High heat maps could have their temperatures toned down to more realistic settings.
  
• Lots more thought would have to be put into strategies, coordination, etc.
  
• We'd actually have a thinking person's shooter.
  
• Other ideas included in previous posts help with concentrated damage, making gauss + ppcs impractical for min-maxers but usable for anyone without the overpowered pinpoint nature.
  
• It's win-win.

Check 'em out!

Edited by Koniving, 25 June 2013 - 03:50 PM.

[Teralitha]

AstroTiki, on 24 June 2013 - 03:29 PM, said:

They might as well just update the Mechwarrior 4 graphics, smooth out those bugs, and call it good.

While that would have been the genius way to go, its much better to waste lots of time, energy and resources to re-invent the wheel in your own image.(sarcasm)

[meteorol]

Niko Snow, on 11 June 2013 - 10:46 AM, said:

How each weapon system will be individually tuned:
Weapons like the PPC would have their thresholds set to 3 with a higher heat penalty per additional simultaneous firing of PPCs.
3 PPC fired = 0 heat penalty
4 PPC fired = 10 heat penalty
5 PPC fired = 20 heat penalty
6 PPC fired = 40 heat penalty

Would be really cool (and by really cool i mean: DO IT) if you would make the penalty kick in with the 3. fired PPC and not the 4. If you can fire 3 ppcs without penalty we will see the following:

1) Far less 4 PPC stalkers
2) Exploding population of: 3 PPC 1 Gauss Highlander (and probalby other mechs who are able to fit this, like Atlas RS/Misery)

A penalty with the 4. PPC will change nothing but the boat.

Edited by meteorol, 25 June 2013 - 07:38 AM.

[SVK Puskin]

Koniving, on 25 June 2013 - 07:19 AM, said:

Perhaps. In the meantime I was digging up old videos and I came across something from the land before time, where Armlock didn't exist. I watched my aim. I watched what was required to get precise aiming. And I watched how terrible the twin PPC + gauss combo was at the time and I thought to myself -- this is freaking genius!

Easiest solution to all of our problems is remove armlock! Enjoy the vid (p.s. the PPC/gauss guy died before the starting point of this time-skipped link. It was that pathetic at the time. Watch my aim!)

Armlock is for new players who had problems with 2 crosshairs, i think they plan to split the community into 2 groups - experienced and unexperienced players and if this is truth than the armlock should be able only for the second group. We will see but yeah the armlock is very good for doing pinpoint demage.

[E_Crow]

Taxxian, on 24 June 2013 - 11:47 PM, said:

You could also remove the "no min range" rule from the ER-PPC, forcing players to build in some other weapons at least...

- give us collisions back

First off, collisions need to be brought back!

But that whole "remove the no-min range" thing? They are sticking to tabletop rules (mostly). Removing that would just eliminate the reason why people get them. The regular PPC has a range that is just barely shorter than the ER PPC's. The only reason why people really buy them is for the no minimum range.