43 replies to this topic

[Gaan Cathal]

Boats. They are canon.

I shall dig it out later, since I'm typing this on my phone ATM but a prior 'purist' thread on The Evils Of The Boat got me looking and discovering that a huge number of stock variants are, infact, boats. Also that Catapults make perfectly canon brawlers (I think it was a Splatcat whine thread).

Relatedly, said investigation also allowed me to determine to my own satisfaction that in a real-time environment with manual aiming, an 'all stock mechs' game mode would be about as balanced as a sumo and an anorexic on a see-saw.

[Deathlike]

hercules1981, on 25 February 2013 - 06:54 AM, said:

Problem would be solved if they made the layouts on mechs just like mw4. Cats look like they have a huge arm for missiles, u put in the 3 sized slot for missiles like in mw4. A Jenner with a smaller looking missile hard point would mayb only have a 1or 2 sized slot. Remember the ac20 in that game was a 3 sized ballistic slot. I pretty sure no mech but the fafnier could mount 2 ac20s or 2 gauss heavy gauss for that matter. Mechs at that point would b drastically different instead of a cent d with 2 of each hardpoint and the version of the dragon that has 2 of each hardpoint just being 10 tons apart. lame!
Having that size of a weapon restriction would b a huge difference maker in this game.

I hated MW4's system. 3 reasons..

1) It was totally borked on many levels, nothing even remotely close to any of the MW games or even the game it is referencing from (armor, engines, heatsinks, etc.)

2) Having played MW2/MW3 and liking those systems because they can be configured (unlike MW4's hardpoint system), and it didn't really bother me too much. I'm sure both games had applied/ignored some rules.. but MWO brings the best of both MW2 and MW3 with MW4's hardpoint system. It's not perfect, but it's better than what was put forth. Mind you, in MW3 (and MW2), the differences only simply became the mech (mech design like arms or legs were more differentiating features than the actual weapons or even stock designs that the majority didn't care too much about, outside of those who liked stock).

3) If you really wanted a better argument, maybe there would be some refinement of the system, similar to the MW4 hardpoint system in the "size" of the weapon..

In any case, MW4 is NOT a good reference point for ANYTHING MW... because it broke too many things that kinda made mech building less enjoyable (original MW4 hellspawns could not even use large lasers... I mean WTF???)

[Zerstorer Stallin]

I'd love to see a size hard point restriction. I think that might solve some problems we are having. I would say that any arguement against not "boating" that starts off with ( or has in it) they limit their play options is pretty much a nice way of saying learn to play noob. It ignores the main fact that is a far superior build. I was Playing with a pug match tonight and dropped against 4 splat kats, it lasted less than 4 min. They rush cave(forest map) and before you could say what the heck they had killed 2 atlas and where making their way to everyone else. 90 point alpha's for a 65 ton mech is a serious issue. RR will not cure the problem as the winning team will get more money and you can bet your bottom dollar over 50% its going to be that team. Hopefully we'll get some sort of info about some serious changes before this goes to a meta campaign or god help us clan tech.

[Stormwolf]

Zerstorer Stallin, on 26 February 2013 - 02:37 AM, said:

I'd love to see a size hard point restriction. I think that might solve some problems we are having. I would say that any arguement against not "boating" that starts off with ( or has in it) they limit their play options is pretty much a nice way of saying learn to play noob. It ignores the main fact that is a far superior build. I was Playing with a pug match tonight and dropped against 4 splat kats, it lasted less than 4 min. They rush cave(forest map) and before you could say what the heck they had killed 2 atlas and where making their way to everyone else. 90 point alpha's for a 65 ton mech is a serious issue. RR will not cure the problem as the winning team will get more money and you can bet your bottom dollar over 50% its going to be that team. Hopefully we'll get some sort of info about some serious changes before this goes to a meta campaign or god help us clan tech.

Valid concerns, I wonder what PGI has to say about this.

[Luccky]

Hard Points are a good idea, just poorly implemented. There needs to be an if/then factor for them. Min/max of what types you can carry and maybe more of a focus on what that Mech can actually do based on it's intended load-out.

Ex. 2 LRM 20's firing out of a 7 Launcher Tube is hard to swallow. An AC20 on the side of a Raven 4X isn't correct either. 2 Gauss Rifles where Machines Guns were (K2). And this is the norm not just a few broken Mechs.

[Zerstorer Stallin]

Luccky, on 26 February 2013 - 06:52 AM, said:

Hard Points are a good idea, just poorly implemented. There needs to be an if/then factor for them. Min/max of what types you can carry and maybe more of a focus on what that Mech can actually do based on it's intended load-out.

Ex. 2 LRM 20's firing out of a 7 Launcher Tube is hard to swallow. An AC20 on the side of a Raven 4X isn't correct either. 2 Gauss Rifles where Machines Guns were (K2). And this is the norm not just a few broken Mechs.

Has anyone posted a question in the Ask The Devs thread?

[Aim64C]

Zerstorer Stallin, on 26 February 2013 - 02:37 AM, said:

I'd love to see a size hard point restriction. I think that might solve some problems we are having. I would say that any arguement against not "boating" that starts off with ( or has in it) they limit their play options is pretty much a nice way of saying learn to play noob. It ignores the main fact that is a far superior build.

The bane of every customization system out there... people can use it to create something they play well with.

Once clan tech is introduced, I'm going to thoroughly enjoy the StormCrow/Ryoken with Two LB-10X ACs, sizing up the engine a tad, and adding SSRM 4s (if I remember correctly). Found that deisgn quite effective at tearing through assault mechs. Crawl up their *** and take out legs or rear armor. You're fast and agile enough to tell mediums and lights to sit the **** down.

Until you run out of ammo. But you've killed half the field by the time that happens.

How does one counter it? Maybe hit me with a NARC and slam me with LRMs. Communicate as a team and let everyone who does not have a Ryoken (or Bushwacker - used the two interchangably) firmly implanted in their ****** to shoot at me while I'm occupied.

There really aren't "superior" builds - unless we are talking people who down-armor assaults and try to go for speed, or something that tries to shatter the role of a 'mech.

There are builds that are optimized for play style or for the role the 'mech plays on the field. You can also factor terrain in, as well, but experienced pilots know how to take a bit of the edge off of the terrain.

Quote

I was Playing with a pug match tonight and dropped against 4 splat kats, it lasted less than 4 min. They rush cave(forest map) and before you could say what the heck they had killed 2 atlas and where making their way to everyone else. 90 point alpha's for a 65 ton mech is a serious issue. RR will not cure the problem as the winning team will get more money and you can bet your bottom dollar over 50% its going to be that team. Hopefully we'll get some sort of info about some serious changes before this goes to a meta campaign or god help us clan tech.

The "splatcat" is canon. That said, the Catapult is not designed as a brawler. Laser weapons on it are difficult to get to track faster moving targets. It also leaves itself relatively vulnerable after each "splat" - and has taken a very serious range penalty to achieve its high damage output (with no guidance, mind you).

As a team, you should be scouting and getting a decent idea of what the opposing team has. I say again - if catapults are wildly charging your lines... they're most likely Splatcats, and should be dealt with accordingly (IE - warn your team that there are splatcats and focus fire on them before they can get into range).

Those guys have, easily, 700 meters of terrain to cover before they can begin doing real damage. If a team of eight mechs can't figure out how to deal with it... then they deserve the collective *** kicking that's in store.

If there were ONE thing that PGI needs to do, it is to implement some better communication for those of us who just hit the "launch" button and get thrown in with who the hell ever. I've seen the tide of a game swayed by a single comment that got just one other person to notice an opportunity and 'save the day.'

[Zerstorer Stallin]

Aim64C, on 26 February 2013 - 03:52 PM, said:

The bane of every customization system out there... people can use it to create something they play well with.

Once clan tech is introduced, I'm going to thoroughly enjoy the StormCrow/Ryoken with Two LB-10X ACs, sizing up the engine a tad, and adding SSRM 4s (if I remember correctly). Found that deisgn quite effective at tearing through assault mechs. Crawl up their *** and take out legs or rear armor. You're fast and agile enough to tell mediums and lights to sit the **** down.

Until you run out of ammo. But you've killed half the field by the time that happens.

How does one counter it? Maybe hit me with a NARC and slam me with LRMs. Communicate as a team and let everyone who does not have a Ryoken (or Bushwacker - used the two interchangably) firmly implanted in their ****** to shoot at me while I'm occupied.

There really aren't "superior" builds - unless we are talking people who down-armor assaults and try to go for speed, or something that tries to shatter the role of a 'mech.

There are builds that are optimized for play style or for the role the 'mech plays on the field. You can also factor terrain in, as well, but experienced pilots know how to take a bit of the edge off of the terrain.



The "splatcat" is canon. That said, the Catapult is not designed as a brawler. Laser weapons on it are difficult to get to track faster moving targets. It also leaves itself relatively vulnerable after each "splat" - and has taken a very serious range penalty to achieve its high damage output (with no guidance, mind you).

As a team, you should be scouting and getting a decent idea of what the opposing team has. I say again - if catapults are wildly charging your lines... they're most likely Splatcats, and should be dealt with accordingly (IE - warn your team that there are splatcats and focus fire on them before they can get into range).

Those guys have, easily, 700 meters of terrain to cover before they can begin doing real damage. If a team of eight mechs can't figure out how to deal with it... then they deserve the collective *** kicking that's in store.

If there were ONE thing that PGI needs to do, it is to implement some better communication for those of us who just hit the "launch" button and get thrown in with who the hell ever. I've seen the tide of a game swayed by a single comment that got just one other person to notice an opportunity and 'save the day.'

Delusional at best. you think with the current pug system that any of what you suggested is possible? Giving excuses for, what to everyone, is a broken 90 point alpha is sad. What other mech can do this? NONE. even 6 PPC dont do this, and you see those builds as well. I'm a big fan of battletech, but saying canon this or that has nothing to do with a game that is fair, balanced and fun to play. Something needs tweeking, as to what, I'm open to suggestions.

Edited by Zerstorer Stallin, 27 February 2013 - 12:29 AM.

[ReguIus]

One of the prblems of the current system appears to be the fact that for almost any Mech chassis in the game, there are 1-2 variants that are superior to the others. Do you ever see anything but Raven 3L, AWS-9M, AS7-DDC, COM-2D, CPLT-K2/A1

The list goes on. One thing from MW4 Mechlab that could work within MWO is the hard capped space limit for each hardpoint. Or something.

[blinkin]

Kurbutti, on 27 February 2013 - 12:23 AM, said:

One of the prblems of the current system appears to be the fact that for almost any Mech chassis in the game, there are 1-2 variants that are superior to the others. Do you ever see anything but Raven 3L, AWS-9M, AS7-DDC, COM-2D, CPLT-K2/A1

The list goes on. One thing from MW4 Mechlab that could work within MWO is the hard capped space limit for each hardpoint. Or something.

actually i run a catapult c4 as my primary and do well. in fact out of the 9 mechs i own the only one of that list i own is the catapult a1 and i will likely sell it once i get done training up pilot skills.

Edited by blinkin, 27 February 2013 - 12:28 AM.

[AdultPuppetShow]

Zerstorer Stallin, on 24 February 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

SSRM's are TO powerfull. Even lrms don't always hit and there many ways to avoid them. Not so with SSRM's. Change their tracking to something more akin to LRMS were they adjust flight but dont track.

Streak Short Range Missiles function in game exactly as they do in the lore and previous titles.

[blinkin]

AdultPuppetShow, on 27 February 2013 - 12:29 AM, said:

Streak Short Range Missiles function in game exactly as they do in the lore and previous titles.

"it should stay this way because this is how it has always been done" is not a valid argument.

unfortunately i cannot find an in depth description of streaks to quote here. the vast majority on these forums and a few credible sources of my own strongly disagree with that statement.

Edited by blinkin, 27 February 2013 - 12:52 AM.

[Max Liao]

The problem with Streaks is the same as the problem with UAC/5's (in my opinion) and heat. It's based on the rapid cool down times. I absolutely get that we can't have 10-second combat rounds in the game. However, SSRM/2 should not be doing more damage than a MedLas, AC/5, etc over the course of 10 seconds.

Streaks should lock on and hit every time they are fired, but maybe their cool down should be longer than a standard SRM/2.

[Stringburka]

AdultPuppetShow, on 27 February 2013 - 12:29 AM, said:

Streak Short Range Missiles function in game exactly as they do in the lore and previous titles.

1. Can TT streaks hit targets 180 degrees behind you? Honest question, not rethorical (I have no idea honestly). They can in MWO at least.
2. If you want them to work like canon, drop the SSRM damage from 5 to 4. They had their damage increased by 25%. Shouldn't that drop?

Max Liao, on 27 February 2013 - 02:43 AM, said:

Streaks should lock on and hit every time they are fired, but maybe their cool down should be longer than a standard SRM/2.

There was a suggestion of making them lose lock after they're fired each time. That sounded like a good and nifty solution that also set them apart from other guided missiles.

However, I think it would take some reprogramming as currently LRM and SSRM lockon is the same thing.

[loliza]

Zerstorer Stallin, on 24 February 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Hard points was an idea that came up over a decade ago to fix boating. It didnt work then and its NOT working now. Now instead of every mech boating you have a few mechs that can boat and had advantages that are becoming more and more obvious. Remove all hard points and hard code limits on setups. Something like :

only 1 ac 20 per mech
only 1 gauss per mech
2 max lrms per mech
4 med lasers max per mech
2 srms max per mech
2 max Ultra AC5 per mech


I'm sure some testing would bring it into focus.

Next the maps sizes are TOO SMALL. Thats why heavies and brawlers are doing so well. Apline should be the standard map size.

SSRM's are TO powerfull. Even lrms dont always hit and there many ways to aviod them. Not so with SSRM's. Change their tracking to something more akin to LRMS were they adjust flight but dont track.

Last any mech with ECM should be unable to load weapons that have any type of flight adjustment, ie LRMS or SSRM's. This would solve almost all your problems, its easy to do and your still in beta so do it before its to late and your game quickly becomes WOT were everyone knew the problems but they werent fixed, and its basically a dead game.

tell me have u seen how alrm targets ?? not much difference from the ssrm2
edit: also this is not canon mwo has stated many times it will have similarities but it is not TT rules
and tell me why do u hate boats ?? lrm boats? send 1 light mech to take out that lrm cata or stalker or i dunno follow an ecm around? stop with the nerf boats stuff (and no i dont run a boat)

Edited by loliza, 27 February 2013 - 04:52 AM.

[Luccky]

This is incredibly simple to do... We're not talking about Omni Mechs here. Go with the basic design of the Mechs and let players mod from there. Here's an example of what I mean:







This will allow a player to Mod what they want in each Hard Point within reason of the Mech. 2 Sm, MD, Lg Lasers but no PPC's. AC 2 or MG but nothing bigger. Any SRM's, Narc or even an LRM 10 if you so desire but none of that is beyond the scope of what this Mech could & should carry.

Edited by Luccky, 27 February 2013 - 06:27 AM.

[Shibas]

How many weapons is considered boating? I mean, if a spider has a single large laser is he "boating a large laser" or just using one? What about a guasspult, is 2 of a weapon (gauss rifle) considered boating or is it just a pair of gauss rifles mounted? Or, what about an atlas with 3 srm 6s, are they "boat srms"? Is there a valid description to "boating" or is it just some term that everyone is tossing around like socialism, where nobody really knows but keeps saying it with negative connotations?

[Syllogy]

Zerstorer Stallin, on 25 February 2013 - 09:28 PM, said:

Well at least there seems to be a majority of us that agree that the current systems bends its knee to boating which is the very thing hard points was put in place to stop. maybe someone out there is listening.

No, there is a majority of the few people that have read this post that agree.

Most people don't even hit the forums until something drastic takes place.

One concept you will have to accept is that there are people that will always min/max regardless of the rules. Taking away Hardpoints or trying to implement Crit Limits will not fix the problem. MW4 tried something like that, MW4 still had problems with boating and min/maxing.

[Stringburka]

Shibas, on 27 February 2013 - 07:30 AM, said:

How many weapons is considered boating? I mean, if a spider has a single large laser is he "boating a large laser" or just using one? What about a guasspult, is 2 of a weapon (gauss rifle) considered boating or is it just a pair of gauss rifles mounted? Or, what about an atlas with 3 srm 6s, are they "boat srms"? Is there a valid description to "boating" or is it just some term that everyone is tossing around like socialism, where nobody really knows but keeps saying it with negative connotations?

Well, not everything has to be able to be defined in hard numbers. Most words rely on a general understanding, not being able to measure something exactly ("how large does a table have to be to be a table?" or "how many legs does a table have to have?" is rarely asked).
Generally, I think people see boating as mounting a large tonnage and/or amount of identical or similar weapons on a 'mech to the exclusion of any other noticable weapons. While the Large Laser spider isn't seen as a boat (a 5 ton weapon on a 30 ton 'mech isn't much at all), I do think many see the raven 4x with an AC-20 is a boat, or at least it's disliked in the same way as a boat.

A hunchback with 9 medium/small lasers is a laser boat due to the vast amount. A 65 ton 'mech using 35 tons of Gauss+ammo tons of Gauss ammo is a gaussboat due to the huge tonnage.

Some 'mechs are boaters by nature - hunchback J and catapult A1 are prime examples.

But most people who dislike boating generally dislike boating that isn't intended (or intended in that way). For example, fitting 6 SRM on an LRM-'mech, or a 16 ton cannon on a 35 ton scout. Especially since that kind of boating goes against what is believable in canon (someone making a custom raven 4x that fits an AC/2 doesn't seem off, but an AC/20 does).

So, as most things, the definition isn't cut in stone. It's still a useful word though, as long as people don't try to deliberately misuse it.

Regards, the socialist.

[Spirit of the Wolf]

Kurbutti, on 27 February 2013 - 12:23 AM, said:

One of the prblems of the current system appears to be the fact that for almost any Mech chassis in the game, there are 1-2 variants that are superior to the others. Do you ever see anything but Raven 3L, AWS-9M, AS7-DDC, COM-2D, CPLT-K2/A1

The list goes on. One thing from MW4 Mechlab that could work within MWO is the hard capped space limit for each hardpoint. Or something.

Okay, I never use a raven, but I agree that the 3L is the most common. The 9M? Not really. I use an 8Q and an 8V all the time. Don't even own a 9M.
The DDC:
Not really. Common, but so is the RS, and the D. The DDC just sees a lot of use because of ECM. The RS because of the 4 energy hardpoints in the arms.
I admit, I love the K2, but I don't put Gauss in the torso.

Max Liao, on 27 February 2013 - 02:43 AM, said:

The problem with Streaks is the same as the problem with UAC/5's (in my opinion) and heat. It's based on the rapid cool down times. I absolutely get that we can't have 10-second combat rounds in the game. However, SSRM/2 should not be doing more damage than a MedLas, AC/5, etc over the course of 10 seconds.

Streaks should lock on and hit every time they are fired, but maybe their cool down should be longer than a standard SRM/2.

I'd love it if streaks had a slightly longer cooldown, but I don't think I'd like losing the lock. If it helps to stop the OP of the 3L though, I'd go for it. Losing my lock would be a small price to pay.

Shibas, on 27 February 2013 - 07:30 AM, said:

How many weapons is considered boating? I mean, if a spider has a single large laser is he "boating a large laser" or just using one? What about a guasspult, is 2 of a weapon (gauss rifle) considered boating or is it just a pair of gauss rifles mounted? Or, what about an atlas with 3 srm 6s, are they "boat srms"? Is there a valid description to "boating" or is it just some term that everyone is tossing around like socialism, where nobody really knows but keeps saying it with negative connotations?

^This.