4
I have circulated this document among a number of competitive players, and made edits based on their input, and the final product was generally well received. I hope the forums will receive it well, and that PGI will take the analysis and suggestions here seriously.
Introduction
There is currently a growing consensus among many of the more competitively-minded players that the game is rapidly becoming one dimensional. Not only in competitive 8-mans, but in higher-ELO PUG matches, the game tends to devolve into a sniping match. Due to low heat and high projectile speeds of PPC-type weapons, it is very easy to hit any ‘Mechs which expose themselves for any considerable period of time. In particular, it encourages “peek and shoot” snipers (usually Stalkers, due to their narrow profile with high-mounted energy hardpoints) who spend a minimal period exposed to potential counter-fire. Moreover, even when these snipers are closed in on, they are often able to out-brawl supposed brawlers - in large part due to the state of SRMs (normally a crucial part of the brawler’s arsenal - now obsolete), and the relative heat efficiency of PPCs and the ERPPC+Gauss combo.
Brawling vs. Sniping: Ballistics
Really, there is only one in each category worth mentioning: the AC/20 for brawling and the Gauss rifle for sniping.
There are some real trade-offs here. The gauss weighs an extra ton, and will explode (though its ammo will not). It also does 5 less damage. On the other hand, it gains extreme range, increased projectile speed, and very low heat.
Ultimately, the extra fragility the Gauss provides, along with the fact that the AC/20 still packs a hard and heat-efficient punch make the trade-off here an interesting one. These two super-heavy ballistic weapons are close to balanced in their different roles - one of the few examples of this.
Ballistic Supplementary
You can "snipe" with AC/2s, their range is long enough. However, they will spread their damage at range, and don't work well in the peek-and-shoot strategy currently prevalent. A gauss will destroy them every time if well played. Likewise, the UAC/5 is a potent weapon, but its fast refire-rate precludes defensive torso-twisting, and therefore really falls more into a fire-support role (where AC/2 and AC/5 also live). The AC/10 tends to be outclassed by the AC/20 or the gauss rifle, depending on the intended use, while the LBX/10 suffers from spread preventing panel-focusing. Machine guns are getting better, but still remain relatively weak. Damage is very low, and "criticals" after armor is stripped are unimportant when it's still so much easier to just knock out the entire section with a "real" weapon.
Brawling vs. Sniping: Energy
ERPPCs and PPCs represent the energy weapons used for sniping. For brawling, the favored weapons are medium and large lasers (and in the past, large pulse). The difficulty, of course, is that heat efficiency is actually not in the favor of brawling weapons. Medium lasers provide a significant tonnage savings compared to the sniper weapons. However, they have the same heat efficiency (i.e. staying power) in a brawl. Moreover, the tonnage savings cannot be used to improve this - since heat sinks are mostly maxed out on snipers anyway, nor can additional firepower be acquired, due to hardpoint number limitations. Large lasers are taken on brawlers primarily to offset hardpoint caps (if you don’t want to take SRMs, and have only 1 ballistic slot, then you need to put on lots of energy to still have firepower). They too have comparable heat efficiency to the PPC (somewhat ahead of the ERPPC) - but suffer from having a one second beam duration, during which the torso must remain still and on target - enough for a skilled opponent to easily line up a shot, while the PPC user is able to shoot and immediately defensively twist.
The PPC is a better brawling weapon than the supposed brawling energy alternatives. Before HSR was implemented for PPC/ballistics, PPCs received some (needed) buffs to their heat and travel speed. The weapon was relatively balanced - even on the strong end. However, once HSR improved their ability to hit targets, those buffs became excessive and these weapons came to dominate gameplay. It may make sense to increase heat and/or decrease projectile speed again.
Energy Supplemental
ERLL seem superficially to fill a similar role to the ERPPC. However, at ranges where they have an advantage over the standard large laser, it is very difficult to keep the beam from spreading damage on a moving target. It is also roughly as hot as the ERPPC. Small lasers and small pulse lasers can have a role on very fast ‘Mechs. However, their 90m range is too close for effective brawling focus fire. Large Pulse and Medium Pulse have shorter ranges and weigh more than their standard variants. More importantly, they generate even more heat per point of damage dealt. This is widely considered to more than offset the slightly shorter beam duration.
Brawling vs. Sniping: Missile
None of the missile weapons really fall into either category effectively at the moment. For the same reason AC/2 is not a sniper weapon, but a fire support, the LRM is also relegated to the fire support role. SSRMs are useful, but the very low total damage (3/hardpoint) means they are really only useful against smaller, harder-to-hit ‘Mechs.
SRM Balance
SRMs have been the quintessential brawler weapon in MWO in months past. In fact, throughout Battletech lore, nearly every ‘Mech that aspired to brawl carried at least one launcher. In the past, SRMs were overpowered. At one time, they did 2.5 damage per missile, and splashed full damage to many components. Moreover, the old trajectory meant that if you "face hugged" an enemy (collided with, and stayed within ~10m), your missiles would all hit in a pinpoint manner. The new trajectory prevents this, and encourages use throughout the effective range - a welcome change.
However, SRMs are currently gimped. Compare, for example, ASRM6 to a large laser. With one ton of ammo, weight is equivalent, and 2 extra crits (and explosive potential on one of them!) are paid. You also do the same damage with both systems. The large laser generates slightly more heat, but the SRM spreads the damage, has a very slow projectile, a limited number of shots, and has a hard-capped 270m max range. The quintessential brawling weapon is out-classed in a brawl by the medium-range weapon. This is not to point out that the Large Laser is overpowered. In fact, it is one of the most balanced weapons in the game. SRMs are inefficient right now, and need a buff. The flight path, spread, and range all make the weapon unique, so the obvious thing to buff would be the damage. 2.0 damage would be a good start. More numbers can be tweaked in the future.
Why the "boating penalty" currently proposed will not fix PPCs or the "peek-and-shoot" meta
One of the most popular builds at the moment is the Stalker with 4 PPCs (often ER, but sometimes a mix of standards or even all PPC). They “ridge hump” to expose themselves to minimal return fire - cresting just the head and arms for a second, shooting, and dropping back down. The game often boils down into two broad stages - first is the sniping phase. Here, the team crests, fires, and drops down to cool off and take cover. Heat is of minimal concern, since you should be safe from any return fire until you decide to crest again - so a 10 heat penalty can be shrugged off if needed. The second phase is encountered when one side tries to push up on the other. For lack of a better word, it is the brawl, when cover is, to a large extent, negated. Here DPS comes into play significantly more - making the penalty meaningful. However, PPCs and ERPPCs generate heat very quickly - even just firing 3 at a time at cool down will quickly bring you to max heat capacity. The extra little bit of alpha would be nice, but is ultimately superfluous during the brawl. Moreover, many other highly effective builds feature Gauss with 2 or 3 ERPPCs - which would not at all be impacted by this change.
Nerfing the interesting (and in no way OP) HBK-4P to the ground would be in vain.
Conclusion
The “peek and shoot” meta, which saw its first iteration with quick shots from minimally exposed jump-snipers has remained completely dominant in high level play despite changes to the dreaded jump sniper. With the changes to jump jets, jump snipers must now expose themselves to significant counter-fire in order to line up a good shot (though it would be nice to remove some of the more nauseating effect - as well as make jump jets useful again in light-on-light combat). However, ‘Mechs such as the PPC-boat Stalker, which could already compete with jump snipers at their best, were unaffected by this change. Naturally, they have become dominant.
Two problems present themselves, leading to the current one dimensional state of the game, where there are 3 weapons (PPC, ERPPC, Gauss), and one strategy (peek and shoot). First is the efficiency of the PPC/ERPPC relative to other weapons. It is both too easy to hit enemies at 1000m+ range and keep up a barrage if and when they close. Both heat and projectile speed (if PPC projectile speed is lowered significantly, Gauss should slow slightly, to preserve the different behaviors between the two weapons) should be looked at for nerfs. It is impossible to know what the right number is without testing, but it certainly does not seem that the current values are comparable to the other energy weapons.
Second (and most important) is the state of SRMs. In the past, a good sniping team still had to fear an aggressive and clever brawling opponent. While running across the open was dangerous, if a team could close under cover to 270m and only take a hit or two on the way there, they could expect their weapons would out damage the enemy’s. However, only the AC/20 is even close to that mark currently - and SRMs are desperately needed to fill that void of viable super-close-range weapon.
What’s more, the presence of effective SRMs also encouraged builds other than pure sniper or pure brawler. Hybrids, which carried both PPC/Gauss and SRMs for defence were very popular, as were fast flanking mediums which could afford SRM tonnage, but not AC/20 tonnage. Very strong PPCs have also contributed to the decline of use of the light and medium classes, since these sniping weapons are very heavy - precluding them from being boated on the lighter classes, and are so fast that hitting even a smaller, faster target at extreme range is not uncommon. Presumably a decrease in their effectiveness would help the light and medium classes.
Once the public test server becomes available, many competitive players would be absolutely delighted to help PGI test some of these changes and come up with solutions that work not only for high-level competitive players, but also more average players. Dialogue between the developers and some members of the competitive community could help the game reach a more dynamic state. Other games, including the wildly successful League of Legends, have followed such a model with great success. We want MWO to be as successful, but fear that it might falter if it does not get input from some of the players who spend the most time and effort studying the game in order to kill each other most effectively.
Edited by Peter2000, 28 June 2013 - 10:39 AM.
.
