102 replies to this topic

[Slow and Decrepit]

InspectorG, on 01 August 2015 - 01:27 PM, said:

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.

I say that because nobody in their right mind will play a mech that takes 10 seconds to turn around. Even if it's lore. Not even 5! You don't play solo much do you? If so you must know that the lights and the mediums are like sharks with fresh meat in the water. So are the heavies, and the assaults, and now you want us to stand out in center field waiting for a ball to come our way only to have the pitcher come running past and catch it on the fly? No thank you, I will sell everything before I'll do that......

InspectorG, on 01 August 2015 - 01:38 PM, said:

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.

Yea for the f'ing light pilots maybe.....

[One Medic Army]

The times when I'm in an assault and fear a single light mech?

Pretty darn rare, and usually it's because someone else already opened said assault. Even my stalkers have few issues, and they're the least agile assaults I have.

Situational awareness, seismic, an understanding of reverse-turns plus twisting, and the only lights that stand a chance are long-range snipers. Which really don't deal that much damage to an assault.

Edited by One Medic Army, 01 August 2015 - 02:29 PM.

[James Warren]

InspectorG, on 01 August 2015 - 01:27 PM, said:

30% Heavy 20% Meduim, 23% Assault 11% Light.

Not to be a nit-picking jerk, but what are the other 16% queuing as?
I agree that the percentages illustrate the current game balance quite effectively - although there are certainly other factors that influence the popularity of each weight class.

I don't think lights have been reliably able to 1v1 assaults of equal skill (and equal pilot skill unlocks) since closed beta. Even as someone who plays lights and mediums almost exclusively, I'm not sure they should be able to. They do need better roles, but I feel that is a different issue altogether.

I'll confess that I'd miss the improved agility provided by the pilot skill unlocks. If mechs are too sluggish they become less fun to play in my opinion. We really need to find the sweet spot for mobility that allows lights and mediums to have an edge without making assaults too cumbersome.

The solution I'm most in favour of is making agility per chassis, with some quirks for variants. This would allow the developers to differentiate better between different mechs - something we will need very soon with the quickly growing number of mechs available, unless we want half of them to feel the same. It will also provide another avenue for balancing chassis and variants without relying on armour or weapons quirks.

I don't think decoupling engine size from agility is necessarily a bad thing for assaults and heavies. Take a mech like the Victor for example - shouldn't it be far more agile than some of the other assaults? I don't see why problems like this couldn't be addressed with the same system.

Edited by James Warren, 01 August 2015 - 02:43 PM.

[Slow and Decrepit]

I'll say this again. I know I won't, but will you be willing to pilot a Assault that takes a full 10 seconds just to turn around? This is got to be the same people that started the "Great Victor Nerf" as it uses the very same line of thinking. Sigh........

[KharnZor]

Armorine, on 01 August 2015 - 11:46 AM, said:

Yeah again no. In a 1vs 1 fight a light will always win vs an assault right now. The only way it loses is if the light pilot makes a mistake. Assaults are already handicapped in agility. The fs9 and article cheetah are the bane of their existence.....
The problem with this is they leg hump and get behind the target. They never stay at 50 meters.

No.
leave the driving of the bus to someone who can drive.

[Shakalaka]

I can see most lights and some mediums being fairly agile, for things that measure their weight in tons -- heck, why couldn't a spider do that cool flip maneuver people on TV use to avoid being shot? Or perform cartwheels? Or dance the macarena? But for heavy and assault mechs, such nimbleness seems considerably less appropriate (exception: ebon jaguar, which was a break dancing machine there for a while). Perhaps rear-mounted weapons and physical attacks would serve better. For example, loosely (and very much so) translating the punches and kicks from battletech into MWO:

Two light mechs are running around attacking an assault mech. Suddenly the assault mech sticks out a leg and trips one of the light mechs. Then the assault mech steps on the fallen light mech's head. Crunch. Then the assault mech rips off the light mech's left leg and uses it as club against the other light mech. Swing batta.

A light mech is running around attacking an assault mech. Suddenly, the assault mech sticks out an arm/weapon barrel and clothes-lines the light mech, possibly beheading it or its pilot. Alas, poor xXyorickXx. Was he a Steiner or a Davion?

Another light mech is running around attacking an assault mech. The assault mech can't turn fast enough to keep the light mech in its sights. But wait. The pilot has equipped this assault mech with a rear-mounted AC20. "Oh, you got machine guns, eh, gonna pick me apart from behind? Hope to roll a bunch of 2s on the hit table, is that it? Well, snake eyes or boxcars, I don't care what location I hit with this baby." BOOM.

See also: leg-mounted weapons.

I know, I know. This ain't battletech.

[Koujo]

The whole argument that "a light mech will kill any assault mech" is built on the false premise that assault mechs should be capable of brawling down any lighter mech. An assault mech should not be played as a one man killing machine. It should be played in a group with more agile mechs watching it's back. The same goes for heavies to a lesser degree.

The rage over this new balance idea is a result of assaults and heavies being too good at everything for too long. There are no real "classes" or "roles" in this game. It just boils down to who can bring the most firepower and a healthy amount of armor. I for one would welcome a downside to playing heavier mechs.

[Alex Morgaine]

Shakalaka, on 01 August 2015 - 04:21 PM, said:

... The pilot has equipped this assault mech with a rear-mounted AC20...

That would be hilarious but so cool to see it used effectively. Tried making a lighter quad mech with rear mounted ac2s as AA/flak with fast retreat action for a fictional alt u military force, though now that I know about turrets on mechs...

[Slow and Decrepit]

Koujo, on 01 August 2015 - 04:33 PM, said:

The whole argument that "a light mech will kill any assault mech" is built on the false premise that assault mechs should be capable of brawling down any lighter mech. An assault mech should not be played as a one man killing machine. It should be played in a group with more agile mechs watching it's back. The same goes for heavies to a lesser degree.

The rage over this new balance idea is a result of assaults and heavies being too good at everything for too long. There are no real "classes" or "roles" in this game. It just boils down to who can bring the most firepower and a healthy amount of armor. I for one would welcome a downside to playing heavier mechs.

So you would pilot a assault that takes 10 seconds to turn around?

Also in Puglanda NO ONE watches your back except enemy lights. You know that this will never change....

[Andi Nagasia]

beleneagle, on 01 August 2015 - 05:00 PM, said:

So you would pilot a assault that takes 10 seconds to turn around?

Also in Puglanda NO ONE watches your back except enemy lights. You know that this will never change....

i think your missing the point, Each Mech would be balanced based on their stats,
so Assaults that have less going for them(HitBoxes, Shape, Weapon height) will have better stats to compensate,

Edit-
so a DWF would have less Stats than a AS7 with the same Engine,
i think thats what we are getting at, instead of both having the same stats,
(im not saying that a DWF is OP and needs to be Nerfed)

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 01 August 2015 - 05:08 PM.

[Slow and Decrepit]

No 10 seconds has already been stated as LORE! Why won't you answer the question? I'm dead serious because I'm the one that has everything to lose. No your not worried because your not in my position! Answer the question!

[Nothing Whatsoever]

ProfessorD, on 01 August 2015 - 11:12 AM, said:

... how would we actually pick the agility values for each chassis or variant?

I would start with the values influenced by the most commonly mounted Engine, quirks and Mech Tree Efficiencies as the starting base line. Then adjust from there.

Quote

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

Yes, with differences in Hardpoints and in some cases geometry there should be some variation.

Quote

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

It certainly will for Clan mechs, but in effect, this should actually aid IS mechs more.

Quote

Would we have any system at all other than arbitrary selections of agility values by PGI?
(I shudder at the thought, but maybe PGI has grown up enough that this kind of thing would work. MASC ended up being kind of cool, after all...)

Remember that we can reference existing values that players can currently see from smurfy, outside of the game.

http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/

Quote

These questions point to the problem with this tread, which has degenerated into people shouting past each other all afternoon arguing with straw men of each others' positions. We clearly saw the idea to decouple engine size from agility presented, but I never saw it replaced with an alternative proposal, so it's really hard to even tell what people are arguing about over there. Can someone make the alternative proposal on how decoupling would work (and, even better, articulate the problem this would solve)? Or just link it if someone's already made it.

Roughly speaking, "Agility" values are torso twist rate, turn rate, arm movement rate, acceleration, deceleration, etc. Agility definitely does not include maximum straight-line speed; we seem to agree on that much.

I might be in a minority with my feeling, but I feel that all mechs are too agile across the board. A big part of the issue is how values are boosted by Mech Tree Efficiencies and quirks, as well as with Engine rating.

So one way to deal with this issue is to set a static set of attributes for mechs and rework Skills. The devs will be addressing these issues in the future, so discussing this topic again should be a good thing, if we can actually deal with the issues at hand and not blow things out of proportion.

[Mcgral18]

beleneagle, on 01 August 2015 - 05:13 PM, said:

No 10 seconds has already been stated as LORE! Why won't you answer the question? I'm dead serious because I'm the one that has everything to lose. No your not worried because your not in my position! Answer the question!

No, it's not 10 seconds in lore. It's just you and the Naysayers who are putting forward a ridiculous time to put people off the idea.


10 seconds is shooting, moving, and melee.


Not just turning around.

Edited by Mcgral18, 02 August 2015 - 12:03 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Mcgral18, on 01 August 2015 - 05:17 PM, said:

No, it's not 10 seconds on lore. It's just you and the Naysayers who are putting forward a ridiculous time to put people off the idea.

10 seconds is shooting, moving, and melee.

Not just turning around.

just this, its turn based and most games that are Turn based say how long a Turn should take,
i think D&D has a 6 second Turn, but you can easily move 30 feet(6Squares) in that time,

[Slow and Decrepit]

I didn't know that there was some time difference between turning around and then shooting. I thought your where aiming as you were turning.....Sorry my bad, and even if its 5 seconds would you play that class?

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Agility should be per-variant. I'd also like to see PGI use the phsyical design of the mech as a sort of starting point. Catapults should have better agility, as should Cataphracts, while something like a Blackjack or a Jagermech should be lower agility.

[Slow and Decrepit]

TT rules don't make for a good FPS or whatever you would call this game. Why are we still trying to reinvent the wheel here?

[Mcgral18]

beleneagle, on 01 August 2015 - 05:31 PM, said:

I didn't know that there was some time difference between turning around and then shooting. I thought your where aiming as you were turning.....Sorry my bad, and even if its 5 seconds would you play that class?

When you carry the firepower to one shot mechs, yes. Yes, people still would. That's called a downside.



Robots who don't have the firepower to easily one shot mechs can have better agility than that. You aren't thinking very critically about this.

[Light-Speed]

InspectorG, on 01 August 2015 - 01:38 PM, said:

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.

Faulty Generalization is a form of Jumping to Conclusions, a logical fallacy.
I declare your opinion invalid.

beleneagle, on 01 August 2015 - 01:52 PM, said:

InspectorG, on 01 August 2015 - 01:38 PM, said:

Yea for the f'ing light pilots maybe.....

What is this supposed to mean?

Edited by Nightingale27, 01 August 2015 - 06:11 PM.

[Tristan Winter]

I've just been playing my Basic skilled Dire Wolf the past few days. It reminds me of the first time I played the Atlas, when I first started playing this game. Coming off the Ravens, the Atlas felt like a walking battleship. With a stock engine and no Skill tree bonuses, you had to plan every movement several seconds in advance to avoid crashing into buildings or being out of position. It really did feel like playing a battleship and it was a totally different experience than playing my Ravens. I loved it.

Fast forward to 2015, I feel like almost every assault mech in the game is too nimble. Playing the Basic skilled Dire Wolf has been a joy, because I rarely feel too bad about the insane amount of pinpoint damage when the match is over in the time it takes me to rotate 360 degrees.

In the lore, the Dire Wolf is a one-mech army, destroying virtually anything in its path. Obviously, that isn't a good starting point for a PVP game, so forget that.

In MWO, the Dire Wolf is a super specialist. It's at the most extreme end of the spectrum, the slowest and clumsiest of all mechs with the most insane firepower. If you bring that kind of specialist into a pug match where there's little or no teamwork, you have to acknowledge the risk you're taking. It shouldn't be able to overcome every situation. But frankly, I think the average pilot in a Dire Wolf beats any light mech 9 out of 10 times, unless he's using a bad build.

Ok, I lost track of my point here.

TL;DR - Playing a really slow and clumsy assault mech is loads of fun. The more you differentiate between engine size and agility, the more variation you get in the game, as each weight class plays and feels different. It moves us closer to role warfare and makes Pokemech collecting more enjoyable as each class offers distinct experiences.

Edited by Tristan Winter, 01 August 2015 - 07:14 PM.