26 replies to this topic

[maxmarechal]

If you consider that the Battlemaster was named thus because he could draw on a PPC,the Marauder was considered terrible because he had two,not to mention the Awesome that could field three.....
and last night i played against a 6 PPC stalker,a LRM 90 (6xLRM15) stalker....
In TT (I'm a great fan of TT but accept easily that this game is not TT) ypu would face Assaults with a potential Alphastrike of 30 to 40 and that was fearsome...just my Splatpult is a 90 alpha build ...!!!!
So my question is...should we be able to fit so many BIG GUNS in our mechs?I mean triple gauss is not far from us...
I like gauss and er ppc like they are now,lrms are fine....but having so many of them on a build just makes them "casual" when they should be "rare" and highly feared!!!
I think a certain max number per weapon type should be made a possibility (with a on/off button) or some battle value given to each mech (with consideration of weaponload) and thus added in the MM so that each team would field a certain total battle value equal to opposing team...
again this is only a personal opinion and not a QQ thread as i field both canon and cheesy builds when playing depending if i want to have fun or make my team competitive...

Edited by maxmarechal, 28 February 2013 - 12:08 AM.

[Elkarlo]

Splattapult in TT= Alpha 42 Damage
(3.5 Missles hit on Average of a SRM6 and the Damage is 2 not 2.5 per missle)
And you spread the damage widely. But it is a crazy critseeker, with a 70% chance of having at least one Critical hit.

But in TT you can keep range better. A Splattapult would be always on Alpine Peaks in a TT game.
So a Splattepult would be simply shredded into pieces, when it won't have enough support.

And thats the biggest difference between TT an a Computergame.

[Marcus Cvellus]

In my opinion we need 4 things
1. Hardpoint rework to restrictions not being so broad like just ballistic/energy slot. (putting gauss on machine gun slot first pops on top of my head)
2. Making torso fixed hardpoints aiming more rigid. (just because you can aim with your hands fast enough, doesn't mean your fixed weapons should be able to follow)
3. Rearm and repair to return (ammo price should make boating less lucrative)
4. Higher restrictions (and/or heat) but higher damage on weapons you just mentioned. Might actually be conected to rearm and repair by option that higher grade/high tech weapon being destroyed must be completely replaced, not repaired for instance.

[grayson marik]

Agree with OP.
There are other approaches to the problem possible, but yours is one of the more simple ones and more doable from a dev time prospect. Furthermore it would not prohibit maximum customization but would instead punish it with a high BV value to be considered next to the ELO rank of the player in MM.

So if you run a cheese build with a very high BV your opponents will have space for better pilots or also cheese builds.

[GalaxyBluestar]

it's really hard to take all this tt- computergame figures translation seriously.

so many things have changed like how heat sinks work to the armour values, firerates etc etc.

so i can't see this thread being valid or gaining any leeway on how to improve the game except everything should be wipped and to start over.

don't see that happening.

[maxmarechal]

GalaxyBluestar, on 28 February 2013 - 12:51 AM, said:

it's really hard to take all this tt- computergame figures translation seriously.

so many things have changed like how heat sinks work to the armour values, firerates etc etc.

so i can't see this thread being valid or gaining any leeway on how to improve the game except everything should be wipped and to start over.

don't see that happening.

I'm not for a massive wipe...that would be a ridiculous proposal so far in development
more like implementing a BV for each mech based on tonnage and weaponload so that skill/teamwork would end being the real difference between two teams
I like big guns,they should be fearsome weapons...so,no need to nerf anything (a tweak here and there eventualy) or QQ about a build or a gameplay...just helping MM becoming more even...
But again this is a personal opinion and you may not agree with it...that's fine for me.

[Solomon Ward]

Marcus Cvellus, on 28 February 2013 - 12:14 AM, said:

1. Hardpoint rework to restrictions not being so broad like just ballistic/energy slot. (putting gauss on machine gun slot first pops on top of my head)

Exactly this.

[Headlessnewt]

Don't limit player creativity, it's the most fun part of the game.

Just balance the weapons against each other better.

[GODzillaGSPB]

Solomon Ward, on 28 February 2013 - 04:11 AM, said:

Exactly this.

Agreed.

PGI will have so much trouble introducing the omnimechs. There is hardly a difference to what the situation is right now. Currently it's just a matter of which mech to choose to in order to build a big-weapon-boat to your liking.

With omni-mechs, the hardpoint limitations will be gone. So then the choice of mech doesn't matter so much in terms of loadout. You choose the design you like best and the tonnage that best fits your desired weapons and then you put 4 gauss rifles in the MadCat...

I fear that PGI messed this up right from the start. Their concept was too free. We have IS-mechs and there should be limitations. Including that changing out all the weapons and engines and other stuff should cost you a little fortune just to do it at all, item-costs EXCLUDED.

But no, the game had to appeal to a big audience. I doubt this can ever be fixed. Instead we will see workaround after workaround. Like giving anti-ECM-capabilities to modules, which aren't even real items, but software. PGI will likely have to fix what has been broken since day 0 for the rest of the development. Just think about the time they waste...

[Andross Deverow]

maxmarechal, on 27 February 2013 - 11:54 PM, said:

If you consider that the Battlemaster was named thus because he could draw on a PPC,the Marauder was considered terrible because he had two,not to mention the Awesome that could field three.....
and last night i played against a 6 PPC stalker,a LRM 90 (6xLRM15) stalker....
In TT (I'm a great fan of TT but accept easily that this game is not TT) ypu would face Assaults with a potential Alphastrike of 30 to 40 and that was fearsome...just my Splatpult is a 90 alpha build ...!!!!
So my question is...should we be able to fit so many BIG GUNS in our mechs?I mean triple gauss is not far from us...
I like gauss and er ppc like they are now,lrms are fine....but having so many of them on a build just makes them "casual" when they should be "rare" and highly feared!!!
I think a certain max number per weapon type should be made a possibility (with a on/off button) or some battle value given to each mech (with consideration of weaponload) and thus added in the MM so that each team would field a certain total battle value equal to opposing team...
again this is only a personal opinion and not a QQ thread as i field both canon and cheesy builds when playing depending if i want to have fun or make my team competitive...

Bleh.... Honestly the only OP mech in game is the invulnerable Raven 3-L....

[maxmarechal]

if you buy a Hollander (comes with a nice shiny gauss rifle and looks great painted Orange!!!! bless Queen Beatrix...) and replace the gun with an AC5 or 10...no problem.
If you take a light mech and replace two tiny MG with two AC2,how do you get them to fit in the mech? not even talking about tonnage or what...just space!!!!

Edited by maxmarechal, 28 February 2013 - 04:35 AM.

[ciller]

Current OP mechs: A1 Splatcat, K2 AC20 cat, Stk SRM boat, STK LRM Boat, CTF Poptarts, Raven 3L, Atlas DDC, UltraAC5 Phract, (any missing?)

And then under these a long long list of quite good mechs followed by just as long of a list of crappy mechs.

I like the direction this is taking - lots of strong builds from all over the place that everyone can complain about. Better then a bunch of weak builds that no one has fun piloting.

P.S. All the OP builds are handily beatable. Use teamwork. terrain, positioning, and intelligence or other OP builds to make up for the cheese.

[Tetatae Squawkins]

Marcus Cvellus, on 28 February 2013 - 12:14 AM, said:

4. Might actually be conected to rearm and repair by option that higher grade/high tech weapon being destroyed must be completely replaced, not repaired for instance.

In CW that makes sense.


Right now? No.

[WolvesX]

All mechs are OP:

SPIDER

Spidermech, Spidermech does whatever a Spidermech does...

Edited by WolvesX, 28 February 2013 - 04:41 AM.

[Terror Teddy]

One factor i would like to see is that the less tonnage USED on a mech should improve movement,twist,tilt and acceleration.

After all, a "light" atlas with 20 tonnes to spare is 20 tonnes lighter and thus mord nimble.

The same could be said if an arm with an ac20 is blown off you loose the weight of the arm and the gun - but your center of gravity woild be affected instead

WolvesX, on 28 February 2013 - 04:41 AM, said:

All mechs are OP:

SPIDER

Spidermech, Spidermech does whatever a Spidermech does...

Gimme web shooters and im a happy spider

[MN03]

People like to whine, it's a way to remove all the stress after being killed. Let's count the OP builds; 1) 6PPC stalkers 2) All LRM boats 3) ECM/Raven or Atlas 4) Splatcats/SRM stalkers 5) Dual gauss rifle. 6) Dual AC/20 7) ??? . Let's remove all weapons except small lasers. pew pew.

[Terror Teddy]

MN03, on 28 February 2013 - 05:20 AM, said:

People like to whine, it's a way to remove all the stress after being killed. Let's count the OP builds; 1) 6PPC stalkers 2) All LRM boats 3) ECM/Raven or Atlas 4) Splatcats/SRM stalkers 5) Dual gauss rifle. 6) Dual AC/20 7) ??? . Let's remove all weapons except small lasers. pew pew.

Well, to be fair, you usually fit a mech for a variety of situations but since we only fight Mech VS Mech we try to bring as much alpha and it's easier to fit multiple weapons of the same type.

There will always be hyperspecialized builds but there will also be counters - but it would be nice to see some kind of reward in NOT utilizing every ounce of tonnage - after all, how often do the military cram in as much gear they can or simply to just get the job done.

If I can get 10% improved movement/Twist/Tilt/Accel by not utilizing 10% of my tonnage then why not.

[Sayyid]

Marcus Cvellus, on 28 February 2013 - 12:14 AM, said:

In my opinion we need 4 things
1. Hardpoint rework to restrictions not being so broad like just ballistic/energy slot. (putting gauss on machine gun slot first pops on top of my head)
2. Making torso fixed hardpoints aiming more rigid. (just because you can aim with your hands fast enough, doesn't mean your fixed weapons should be able to follow)
3. Rearm and repair to return (ammo price should make boating less lucrative)
4. Higher restrictions (and/or heat) but higher damage on weapons you just mentioned. Might actually be conected to rearm and repair by option that higher grade/high tech weapon being destroyed must be completely replaced, not repaired for instance.

I love all those ideas, but why not just go back to stock only mechs. Because thats almost what you would end up with in your suggestions. Not that I am against that, I would love to have a stock only game mode. I may actually play more than once or twice a month.

[MN03]

Sayyid, on 28 February 2013 - 05:36 AM, said:

I love all those ideas, but why not just go back to stock only mechs. Because thats almost what you would end up with in your suggestions. Not that I am against that, I would love to have a stock only game mode. I may actually play more than once or twice a month.

Stock only will ruin the game. Being able to make your own mech is the most fun part of this game. Mech hardpoints should be balanced and stacking more than 4 of the same weapon should give a downside (more heat?).

[Sayyid]

MN03, on 28 February 2013 - 05:46 AM, said:

Stock only will ruin the game. Being able to make your own mech is the most fun part of this game. Mech hardpoints should be balanced and stacking more than 4 of the same weapon should give a downside (more heat?).

You never played MPBT did you? Or in the pods in Chicago. Both were stock only games and they were a blast.

You adapt, improvise and overcome.