102 replies to this topic

[Armorine]

I think it's funny you point to the storm crow as it's an outlier as far as mechs go. A perfect storm of hit boxes and hard points and agility. The timber on the other hand(this arguments gonna go here eventually) is a similar case but it ironically falls in line with the lore as it was intended as a true battlefield superiority mech. Feared and reveared as a killer even into the jihad era.

Edited by Armorine, 01 August 2015 - 12:39 PM.

[Mcgral18]

Armorine, on 01 August 2015 - 12:33 PM, said:

You must have a fragile ego to attack others on the internet.

Yes there are a lot of lolpha builds but there are an equal number of dps and ranged builds. Lights are typically built as knife fighters and excel in close.

You're the one throwing blatant lies out there, and doesn't care to be corrected.

Sorry, you're wrong.

[Stubar]

Mcgral18, on 01 August 2015 - 12:28 PM, said:

No, most average Assaults are built for an Easy Button LOLpha and kills things fast. Bad builds are spread out.



Please, stop showing us how bad you are. I've got 9 hours of Premium left if you want to lose.

Hey McGral,
You never need to worry about premium time for a duel with these dummies. I think at last count I still have over a years worth, so just schedule them to show up on duel night, brother.

BTW, dummies. McGral is the real deal. He will smoke you in a duel, fool. And then I will sing a song about it.

RA!
Stubar

[Armorine]

Mcgral18, on 01 August 2015 - 12:39 PM, said:

You're the one throwing blatant lies out there, and doesn't care to be corrected.

Sorry, you're wrong.

Again fragile ego. You can't have an argument about something with out attacking the other person.

There's no lie about what I say. It's a differing opinion from yours. Something you don't don't seem to understand. Lie would entail something intentional.



In regards to op even though I don't agree with the idea. Considerations for agility would have to be made towards the mechs intended purpose. Brawlers would obviously have high torso twist rates. Strikers probably not so much. Fire support would probably have less so. A big issue I draw with this we have little info on twist rates from lore. Though is some. We be cutting knew territory.

[ProfessorD]

Armorine, on 01 August 2015 - 12:53 PM, said:

...
In regards to op even though I don't agree with the idea. Considerations for agility would have to be made towards the mechs intended purpose. Brawlers would obviously have high torso twist rates. Strikers probably not so much. Fire support would probably have less so. A big issue I draw with this we have little info on twist rates from lore. Though is some. We be cutting knew territory.

I think trying to draw insights from lore (EDIT: I suppose I meant "TableTop" more than "lore" here) on mech agility is probably a mistake. There, the closest factors we have to "agility" really are all the same for all mechs (firing arcs for torso and arm mounted weapons). That obviously isn't what any of us want.

Edited by ProfessorD, 01 August 2015 - 01:02 PM.

[aniviron]

ProfessorD, on 01 August 2015 - 12:01 PM, said:

I find it really interesting that I don't see any discussion of the role of basic efficiencies in that thread. I think lots of people ignore them, but the basic efficiencies are enormous bonuses. I still remember the first match I played after finishing double-basics in my Highlander. It was a whole different mech, and a bit of a moment of realization for me that mech agility matters a lot.

The pilot trees have to go. It blows my mind that PGI refuses to touch something that they openly admit is a placeholder system and affects every single drop of every single mechwarrior in every match of MWO.

We've all been there: you just bought a new mech, you're trying to turn and ohhhhhh god you just can't match the agility of everything else you own, and everything else you're facing off against. That's how it should be, the heavies and assaults should be a bit slow to turn, a bit ponderous in the twist. The efficiencies make a gigantic difference, especially when doubled.

I don't think removing them would be as big of a deal as people claim, since everyone gets affected the same way. Heavy and assault pilots, who constitute a significant majority of players, would obviously be unhappy about this, but the heavy queue has been at 50% for long enough I think.

The only problem is that PGI needs to have something for people to grind. I understand why they have the pilot trees, it means any time they sell a mech, they sell at least two more as well. But I don't know what they could replace the pilot skills with that wouldn't just bring the same problems back into the game, but would also be worth grinding for.

[Mcgral18]

aniviron, on 01 August 2015 - 01:02 PM, said:

The pilot trees have to go. It blows my mind that PGI refuses to touch something that they openly admit is a placeholder system and affects every single drop of every single mechwarrior in every match of MWO.

You're not a fan of robots that:

• Accelerate 45% faster
  
• Brake 50% faster
  
• Twist 20% further
  
• Cool 15% better
  
• Have a 20% higher heat capacity
  
• Torso Twist 40% faster
  
• Move its arms 30% faster
  
• Turn 20% faster

That's on top of being 10% faster with land speed, starting up 30% faster, and firing its weapons 5% faster.



Yeah...I can see that.

Edited by Mcgral18, 01 August 2015 - 02:04 PM.

[Armorine]

Agreed. Cookie cutter stats would make me break my keyboard. I suppose it could be used as a balancing factor but that worries me greatly as past balancing moves have tended toward heavy handed.

That leaves a few options. Stats based on intended use? Derive it based on design? Go by weight? Or just go on feel?

Personally I'd lean towards on design. Good example the hunchies a big gun some what slow speed approach. It would most likely be given a wide arch and relatively fast twist speed.

One thing I will admit id like to see is torso twist limited to prevent clipping on a per mech basis. The king crabs a prime example. At full locks the knees would chuck Norris the arms. The problem would be that this nerfs the grab.

[Deathlike]

aniviron, on 01 August 2015 - 01:02 PM, said:

The pilot trees have to go. It blows my mind that PGI refuses to touch something that they openly admit is a placeholder system and affects every single drop of every single mechwarrior in every match of MWO.

We've all been there: you just bought a new mech, you're trying to turn and ohhhhhh god you just can't match the agility of everything else you own, and everything else you're facing off against. That's how it should be, the heavies and assaults should be a bit slow to turn, a bit ponderous in the twist. The efficiencies make a gigantic difference, especially when doubled.

I don't think removing them would be as big of a deal as people claim, since everyone gets affected the same way. Heavy and assault pilots, who constitute a significant majority of players, would obviously be unhappy about this, but the heavy queue has been at 50% for long enough I think.

The only problem is that PGI needs to have something for people to grind. I understand why they have the pilot trees, it means any time they sell a mech, they sell at least two more as well. But I don't know what they could replace the pilot skills with that wouldn't just bring the same problems back into the game, but would also be worth grinding for.

Part of the pilot tree "problem" is that everyone's so dependent on stuff.

Similarly to quirks and those weapon modules, the fact that some of those efficiencies are like overquirkage... 5% is not significant (unless you are a Light/Medium under speed tweak), but 20 to 25% faster is grossly significant (ESPECIALLY torso twisting).

Placeholders... placeholders EVERYWHERE.

Mcgral18, on 01 August 2015 - 01:09 PM, said:

You're not a fan of robots that:

• Accelerate 45% faster
  
• Brake 50% faster
  
• Twist 20% further
  
• Cool 15% better
  
• Have a 20% higher heat capacity
  
• Torso Twist 40% faster
  
• Move its arms 30% faster
  
• Turn 20% faster

That's on top of being 10% faster with land speed, starting up 30% faster, and firing its weapons 5% faster.



Yeah...

This is part of why I hate the efficiencies. We're so dependent on them, it's like drugs or something. It's not good ultimately.

[Armorine]

Mcgral18, on 01 August 2015 - 01:09 PM, said:

You're not a fan of robots that:

• Accelerate 45% faster
  
• Brake 50% faster
  
• Twist 20% further
  
• Cool 15% better
  
• Have a 20% higher heat capacity
  
• Torso Twist 40% faster
  
• Move its arms 30% faster
  
• Turn 20% faster

That's on top of being 10% faster with land speed, starting up 30% faster, and firing its weapons 5% faster.


Yeah...

This is an area I will agree with you. The skill set gives vets an extreme advantage vs new users. I can understand a veteran pilot knowing his gear better and gaining a small benefit. But going above 10% on anything is ridiculous and even that is pushing it. I could see a master pilot being a few percent faster or better with his equipment but that's it.

[Slow and Decrepit]

InspectorG, on 01 August 2015 - 11:48 AM, said:

Agility: Turn rate, accel, deccel, twist rate/range, Arm range/rate, ...perhaps even climbing rate. Can be quirked by variant/chassis.

IMO:

Assaults at 100 tons take 10 seconds to about-face
85 tons, 8 seconds.

Heavies also receive similar treatment but at faster rates.

This will make MOST assaults very 'firing-lane' in tactical outlook. Heavies become less 'athletic'. Gives Mediums more role as light Calvary and Lights as Assault killers.
Some heavies/assaults should remain 'fast' but underpowered. Summoners, Gargoyle, Dragon,/etc.

Also BUFF FRONTAL CT/ST armor and perhaps structure and Legs armor/structure on Assaults/heavies.

LEAVE LINEAR SPEED alone, maybe even quirk some variants for more accel/deccel as long as not turning.

No, no, no. If this where to happen, all you would see is light mechs. There wouldn't be ANY heavy, or assault mechs at all! You must have fallen and hit your head.

[InspectorG]

Armorine, on 01 August 2015 - 12:53 PM, said:

In regards to op even though I don't agree with the idea. Considerations for agility would have to be made towards the mechs intended purpose. Brawlers would obviously have high torso twist rates. Strikers probably not so much. Fire support would probably have less so. A big issue I draw with this we have little info on twist rates from lore. Though is some. We be cutting knew territory.

The only real 'intended purpose' currently in MWO is DAMAGE. As ive said, the best avenue to make that damage WIN for you is PPFLD. Most damage over Least time over Least are onto enemy Vital component.

Thats it. Until we get Recon...its not gonna change. No need for roles because the Heavy class is the best current blend of Speed, Agility, Firepower, Hitpoints.

This is shaped by the lack of roles and objectives in MWO.

Brawling is not ideal because of average weapon range and map composition. Plus range weapons usually work in a brawl just as well and in range. Vice-versa, not so much.

Striking and skirmish is fine...IF you can coordinate it but then again the alpha dilemma happens.
You trade firepower for speed/agility at diminishing returns to firepower...in a game dependent upon firepower.

How are you gonna Strike and Skirmish a Wall of Stalker lazor spears?

By nerfing Heavy and Assault Agility, teams have to support the less agile mechs and pilots NEED to position better.
Mediums would be the striker of choice and Lights could be Assault/slow mech hunters.

If you extrapolate from BT, a 3/5 speed Assault would take about 10 seconds to about face.
With Assault and heavy role being to set up firing lines and area denial, this sounds about right.

Mediums would be the 'foot soldiers', lights would be 'Spec Ops' so to speak.

Or Chess analogy,
Mediums = Pawns
Lights = Queen/Knight
Heavies = Bishop
Assault = Rook

[Deathlike]

beleneagle, on 01 August 2015 - 01:15 PM, said:

No, no, no. If this where to happen, all you would see is light mechs. There wouldn't be ANY heavy, or assault mechs at all! You must have fallen and hit your head.

The last time that actually happened, we had the "Magic God Box" that had a counter of just itself (a far more devastating jamming device that erased the opfor from their teammates radar) AND Streaks that cored everyone with poorer hitreg on a mech that now has extra large leg hitboxes that you can't miss.

Yes, that's the only time where you could argue that was true, where every mechanic favored the Raven-3L's design for a long period of time.

Edited by Deathlike, 01 August 2015 - 01:44 PM.

[InspectorG]

beleneagle, on 01 August 2015 - 01:15 PM, said:

No, no, no. If this where to happen, all you would see is light mechs. There wouldn't be ANY heavy, or assault mechs at all! You must have fallen and hit your head.

Why do you say that?

Why should an Artillery(assault) piece be as agile as a Green Beret(light)?

MWO is currently about firepower. Start emphasizing other avenues of combat and perhaps the cue will be something other than
30% Heavy 20% Meduim, 23% Assault 11% Light.

Agility and Info-warfare are the other aspects missing.

[Slow and Decrepit]

If this happens the game will die. Your not going to expect all this role playing in solo play to actually happen do you?

[InspectorG]

beleneagle, on 01 August 2015 - 01:32 PM, said:

If this happens the game will die. Your not going to expect all this role playing in solo play to actually happen do you?

Solos barely press 'R'. Solos barely coordinate or communicate. Solos rarely run effective builds. Solos rarely listen to good advice. Solos rarely get good beyond 'average' skill.

And yet...

They keep playing.

I liken it to the 'Schooling' effect in Texas Hold'em.

MWO is gonna die someday regardless. Might as well make it good and memorable.

[Armorine]

I have to agree there. If it takes 10 seconds to turn around your gonna see the assault cue be less then the light cue. The assaults are suppose to be big and bad but slow. They'd have decent agility but be vulnerable to hit and run.

This topic I feel goes hand in hand with the lack of defined role warfare in mwo. Lights were used as garrison, scout, skirmishes and raiders. The big advantage they offered was cost. You could field several lights for the price of an assault. Only one role is readily available, scouting, even then only to relay position and fire support data for other mechs. There needs to be greater opportunities for lights to fill their intended role but at this point in mwos ongoing development that simply isn't available yet. We have glorified death matches with no consequence for the outcome.

[SuomiWarder]

In answer to the original post - my suggestions to decoupling mech agility from engine size would include a few things. Base values start on tonnage. An 80 ton assault would start a bit more agile than a 100 ton for example. Then you have the xp system for mech advancement. A mech module or two perhaps. And finally (yes, I broke the rule against starting a sentence with "and"), something not in BTech canon. Maybe let people pull or add an actuator to arms and legs that change the stats, and perhaps have "performance enhancement" parts that can be put into the torso to increase twist, etc. (Call it Improved gyro, heavy duty arm myomer, etc.)

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Quote

Would we allow the possibility of different variants having different agility, within the same chassis?

Yes, I like the idea of flavor even between variants, but it would probably be less of a difference than maybe between chassis'.

Quote

Would the variant's stock engine or engine cap play any role?

Maybe in adding flavor, but not the base agility. Base agility would be strictly tied to weight rather than strictly speed.

Quote

Would we have any system at all other than arbitrary selections of agility values by PGI?

We have that now, the only difference would be in deciding the ranges of agility based on tonnage instead of speed. If it were me, I would probably set the agility to the optimal XL engine for that weight or something around that, but adjusted to account for pilot skills, because those throw a serious wrench in balance, honestly I would love to see them done away with completely.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 01 August 2015 - 01:43 PM.

[Deathlike]

As a tangent to my earlier post, I actually wonder if I should actually pose the question about the "Magic Jesus Box" removing the opfor's teammates from their radar while under ECM.

Deathballing would surge far more than it would now...