Jump to content

Ammo Detonations To Increase When Stored In The Same Location In Quantity

Metagame Gameplay Weapons

16 replies to this topic

#1 Shaio

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 101 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 15 September 2014 - 07:35 PM

Hear we are one year later and still Battle Mechs march on with no concern for the many TONS of Ammo they are hauling around. Mechs running ballistics/Missiles as primary will often carry 4 to 7 tons of ammunition during a match. To date it has been my experience that even carrying that much ammo I rarely suffer a deadly ammo explosion resulting in a dead mech or Half a Mech in the case of Clan Mechs.

The very moment you lose that last point of armor on a section carrying carrying 4+ Tons of ammo you should be worrying about any stray fire triggering a detonation and if one of the ammo crits dose detonate it should all but guarantee that any ammo in the same location detonates as well.

There should be more deliberation when adding ammo to a Mech as to Too Much VS Too Little. Right now it is simply stuff the Mech with as much ammo as you can use in a drop.

PGI Make the Ammo go Boom!! more often ;)

Edited by Shaio, 16 September 2014 - 02:23 PM.


#2 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,736 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 15 September 2014 - 07:41 PM

If that's the case, then give us the "Jettison Ammunition" button. It was in MW2 FFS.

Sure don't want to have those SRM ammo sitting in my legs when my SRM launchers are busted.

Edited by El Bandito, 15 September 2014 - 07:42 PM.


#3 Carrie Harder

    Clone

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 678 posts
  • LocationCarrying pugs up Mount Tryhard

Posted 15 September 2014 - 07:45 PM

The reason mechs carry so much ammo in MWO is because they have to. Generally, in TT you could get by with just 1 ton for most weapons, and even then that might be too much! In MWO, most weapons need 2-3+ tons of ammo.


As for explosion chances, my own stance is that the rate should be 100%, but with only about 10% damage.

The reason for 100% chance is because randomized "risks" are hard to balance by; it should be all or nothing, no in-between.The reason for only 10% damage is so that ammo-based weapons wouldn't be utterly crippled into the ground by the previous change. Even then, the drastically increased frequency of explosions would result in much more damage to your robot from 'splosions than our current game state.

Edited by Carrie Harder, 15 September 2014 - 07:47 PM.


#4 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 15 September 2014 - 07:45 PM

View PostEl Bandito, on 15 September 2014 - 07:41 PM, said:

If that's the case, then give us the "Jettison Ammunition" button. It was in MW2 FFS.

Sure don't want to have those SRM ammo sitting in my legs when my SRM launchers are busted.


Sure, once R&R is brought back. ;)

#5 Rebas Kradd

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,969 posts

Posted 15 September 2014 - 07:45 PM

Hey, Shaio is alive.

#6 Kaspirikay

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • 2,050 posts

Posted 15 September 2014 - 07:58 PM

i remember when i ran a streak kitty. i placed tons of ammo in my legs. once i was the last guy and had no armor in my legs, i hopped down a hill and my ammo sploded and we lost.

i lol'd

#7 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 15 September 2014 - 08:36 PM

Making it too prohibitive to carry ammo will just result in energy weapons becoming supremely dominant. Its a bad idea.

However CASE should do more. And ammo exploding outside a location with CASE should be more lethal.

#8 Shaio

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 101 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 16 September 2014 - 01:47 PM

View PostCarrie Harder, on 15 September 2014 - 07:45 PM, said:

Generally, in TT you could get by with just 1 ton for most weapons, and even then that might be too much! In MWO, most weapons need 2-3+ tons of ammo.


Look I am not going to try to make comparisons to the TT game, I simply believe that Mechs should face a degree of risk when they over specializing. Ammo dependent boats such as LRM/SRM/AC Mechs should be more fragile when comparded to more balanced energy/ballistic builds. Energy boats must deal with heat management or risk shunting down in front of enemy units or in extreme cases melting down from the inside out.

With Ammo in it's current state the only thing you need worry about is running out, which is why players routinely load-up with as much ammo as they can fire off in a match. I have even watched players unload a ton (literally) of ammo on a hill side because they have ammo to spare. Given the current state of the game ammo management is an after thought at best.

#9 Shaio

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 101 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 16 September 2014 - 02:11 PM

View PostKhobai, on 15 September 2014 - 08:36 PM, said:

Making it too prohibitive to carry ammo will just result in energy weapons becoming supremely dominant. Its a bad idea.


I am in no way in favor of the game being slanted toward energy or ballistic Mech builds. The way I see it MWO should favor more balanced builds and have boating as viable but with tradeoffs. A Mech should be able to carry 3 to 4 Tons of ammo with minimal risk, but amounts above and beyond 5 Tons should increase your risk significantly.

Additionally Ammo needs to be more vulnerable to internal damage from extreme overheating. i.e. high chance of ammo explosions from internal heat damage.

Edited by Shaio, 16 September 2014 - 02:13 PM.


#10 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 02:45 PM

I agree the game should favor more balanced builds

But I disagree that ammo explosions should be the way to balance ballistics.

The last thing the game needs is mechs dying faster, let alone to RNG ammo explosions. If you die you should know the reason why. You should never die because of bad RNG.

#11 terrycloth

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 769 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 02:57 PM

Having to carry ammo is the balance. Having it explode isn't necessary, which is why it's currently rare.

Balanced builds are encouraged by lasers being hot and ammo making other weapons heavy.

#12 KraftySOT

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,617 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 03:03 PM

View PostKhobai, on 16 September 2014 - 02:45 PM, said:

I agree the game should favor more balanced builds

But I disagree that ammo explosions should be the way to balance ballistics.

The last thing the game needs is mechs dying faster, let alone to RNG ammo explosions. If you die you should know the reason why. You should never die because of bad RNG.



But,,,thats not battletech/mechwarrior. The RNG is all the fun. Theres plenty of ways to handle it that let you know, hey, you screwed up, other than just your mech exploding and a tiny line of text saying why. They could give you a second or three to jettison as it cooks off. As well more case use.

Not wanting to die because of the RNG is the bush league nancy boy route my friend.

#13 Darklord

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 235 posts
  • LocationChicago Battletech Center

Posted 16 September 2014 - 03:22 PM

Ammo bay fires when running to hot, how I miss those from the Battletech pods.

#14 Darwins Dog

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,476 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 04:07 PM

I would love to see ammo explosions be more common. Exact numbers to be determined by testing/tweaking, but it should be a lot more common. As it stands right now, your best bet is to take 1/2 tons of ammo and fill up every crit space where you have ammo. Since most weapons have to hit more than once to take out a critical location, you spread the damage out across more crit locations. You reduce the chance of losing ammo and getting an explosion.

Taking more ammo reduces the chances of ammo explosions. It also protects your weapons.

If you want to protect a missile launcher from enemy fire, surround it with as many missiles as you can.

Ammo should not be crit padding.

#15 Hans Von Lohman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 1,466 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 04:10 PM

I would have legs only mount jump jets and heat sinks. Nothing else should go in your legs.

Edited by Hans Von Lohman, 16 September 2014 - 04:11 PM.


#16 Empyrus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 210 posts

Posted 16 September 2014 - 04:11 PM

View PostCarrie Harder, on 15 September 2014 - 07:45 PM, said:

The reason mechs carry so much ammo in MWO is because they have to. Generally, in TT you could get by with just 1 ton for most weapons, and even then that might be too much! In MWO, most weapons need 2-3+ tons of ammo.



Interestingly many people still over-ammo their mechs. Especially LRM boats. People waste ammo too much... i usually run with smaller ammo loads but aim carefully, i don't take potshots with ammo weapons.
LB-X users are the worst offender, the weapon is a great crit-seeker but as a damage dealer it is terrible. Don't take too much ammo for it.

No good solution to this though. Halving armor to the TT levels would reduce the need for ammo... but it would also make alpha striking much, much more effective.

#17 CMDR Sunset Shimmer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 5,335 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationNetherlands

Posted 16 September 2014 - 05:24 PM

View PostKhobai, on 16 September 2014 - 02:45 PM, said:


The last thing the game needs is mechs dying faster, let alone to RNG ammo explosions. If you die you should know the reason why. You should never die because of bad RNG.



No, wrong.

You SHOULD die because of Bad RNG.

Note bad RNG here means you got the crappy end of the RNG stick on a lucky critical hit from your opponent.

That's simulating...you know... LUCK. Something that's as important to combat as is the weapon you brought and your ability to use it.

People Decry RNG all the time because they feel it's something outside their control, guess what, IT IS.

If you're playing a combat flight sim, and you take some hits, and suddenly, your missile system stops working... do you know what that is? That's what happens when the RNG hates you in a combat flight sim... that's a lucky shot for the enemy, and an unlucky hit for you.

You know... SIMULATION.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users