468 replies to this topic

[Pinselborste]

i mean stats to balance things out, not controlls or game mechanics. the reason TT stats where balanced in TT is cause they where designed for a game based on dice roles and non realtime movement.

if you now can decide where you shoot by yourself and move in realtime, the number need an overhaul, and in this case all stats like armor values, damage, heat even need new weapons and so on would need to change, unlike what we have now where devs pick values of some weapons from TT, some get changed and everyone wonders why balance gets screwed.

[AndyHill]

They also balanced the weapons and equipment based on their weight, heat, damage potential, ammo, vulnerability, range etc. which can be and probably is transferable to a real-time environment. The 'mech speeds are also probably fairly transferable, except for the fact that you can't hop from cover to cover with impunity.

The real difference is the shooting by yourself part - and in MWO pretty much nothing has been done about that, but a lot has been done for the numbers. And IMRO the result has not been quite optimal so far, the main issue still exists and I don't think the numbers are more balanced than on the TT either. More importantly, the current balance that has been crafted around a specific set of numbers - again without addressing the base issue - will be torn apart with the inclusion of clantech.

[Tombstoner]

I think clan tech has been looked at in internal builds and its why DHS need to be 1.4 HPS not 2.0.
we also dont know how we obtain clan tech. i think it will be plop down the credits with a hard barrier in the form of no clan tech on IS mechs.

The devs have stated that any RNG or cone of fire affect gets in the way of player skill. thus tweaking numbers is all that's left.

[Pht]

blinkin, on 24 March 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

ok now read this again and take a moment to contemplate how moronic this criticism is vv

When you can't show how what you're saying is true ...

Toss baseless insults that don't apply?

Quote

you have already admitted that there are parts of table top that are broken.

... What I have posted is that EVERY game fails at some point, and that because of this fact, this complaint applies equally to every game - it canot be used to discriminate between gaming systems.

I have NOT admitted that the tabletop is "broken."

Quote

i have stated very explicitly that we should take the parts that work and abandon those that don't.

What rules from the TT "don't work?"

[Pht]

blinkin, on 25 March 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

MWO does not fit clearly within any genre.

It fits quite clearly within a well defined genre that has been around for a long time: Armored unit combat piloting imitation("sim").

[Pht]

AndyHill, on 23 March 2013 - 02:32 AM, said:

TT rules can not be directly translated to a real-time simulator,...

Actually, they can: http://mwomercs.com/...different-idea/

You can even modify the weapons refire rates and keep the balance from the TT, when you realize that the mechanic that balances the weapons output vs refire rate is the heat mechanic - if you want a weapon to fire faster, make it hotter, and it's overall performace will stay the same as it did in the TT.

[blinkin]

Pht, on 25 March 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

When you can't show how what you're saying is true ...

Toss baseless insults that don't apply?

do i really need to prove the case that nothing is perfect? <-if your answer is yes then the insult is not baseless.

... What I have posted is that EVERY game fails at some point, and that because of this fact, this complaint applies equally to every game - it canot be used to discriminate between gaming systems.

I have NOT admitted that the tabletop is "broken."

take a look at these two sets of enlarged text. now think about them... just a little.

What rules from the TT "don't work?"

how about i don't answer your moronic questions and instead you carefully explain to me why table top battle tech is the most perfect game ever and has no flaws.

i am sorry but i do not agree that table top is perfect. i am sorry that i always think there is room for improvement. i am sorry for making such a grievous error as to suggest that some things can be improved upon.

Edited by blinkin, 25 March 2013 - 05:26 PM.

[blinkin]

Pht, on 25 March 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

It fits quite clearly within a well defined genre that has been around for a long time: Armored unit combat piloting imitation("sim").

it's a simulator then? it's not a flight sim, i have played a few of those. not a tank simulator, played those too.

simulator isn't a game play type. it defines a game as making a certain amount of effort to accurately represent how vehicles (mostly) operate or would operate in real life. table top makes a good effort but it deffinitely does not have enough dice rolls or rules to cover a simulation accurately.

[Seox]

blinkin, on 25 March 2013 - 05:26 PM, said:

it's a simulator then? it's not a flight sim, i have played a few of those. not a tank simulator, played those too.

simulator isn't a game play type. it defines a game as making a certain amount of effort to accurately represent how vehicles (mostly) operate or would operate in real life. table top makes a good effort but it deffinitely does not have enough dice rolls or rules to cover a simulation accurately.

Don't bother, he keeps posting that it's a sim in other threads but backing off and saying it's not what he said when you point out that it's not even close.

[Xerxys]

I agree with the OP. You people who are trying to argue this as they needed to double armor b/c of how much damage is done now need only read the thread fully. If PGI had cut the damage done and the heat generated by the weapons the armor buff would never have been needed. They increased the RoF b/c the saw the drawback of 10 second rounds. The OPs point is entirely valid if you bother to read the thread fully and not pick out bits and pieces to try and argue.

Missiles would have been an issue, but with a bit of thinking as well as some trial and error the problem could have been solved. I find it particularly hilarious that PGI now has missiles running at pretty damned close to TT damage currently, and will most likely find that TT values are the best fit.

It truly amazes me how many people can pick only one part of the topic to tear to pieces when the rest of the statement already contradicts their argument. I can't tell if people are trying to be that argumentative, or are just naturally that stupid.

The OP states that with the increase of RoF by a multiplier of 3, the damage and heat production should have been divided by 3. This would have nullified the fallacy of doubling armor as a necessity. I may have been found later on that an increase would be needed. The major point to all of this is that you can't change just one thing when their are so many other things attached to it. You can't increase rate of fire w/o reducing damage and heat required. Armor be damned, I don't really care, it's how the other aspects of the game are working with it. If you triple rate of fire, armor needed to be tripled, heat capacity tripled, heat dissipation tripled. This would allow energy weapons the chance to make their advantage known, the whole unlimited ammo thing.This is similar to basic mathematics. You can't increase one side of the equation w/o doing the same to the other and all changes must equal out. This is where PGI failed from the gate and is why nothing is seemingly balanced.
To address the issue of people alpha striking with particular builds. This is happening anyways. All you have to do is stick around to watch in spectator mode after you die to see this. Having double heat sinks working as they were designed would increase the rate at which they can alpha strike, but the reduced heat capacity would shut them down more frequently. Then if the other drawbacks to running hot were implemented they would be all but useless. They may aim correctly, but the shots would still have a fair chance to miss. This would give the smart players a decisive upper hand when dealing with these people.

SRMs are not missiles at all in their current incarnation. They are, for all intents and purposes, merely rockets. To have some guidance, particularly if the owner bothered with artemis, should have some actual guidance involved with them. Even if it was like the TOW missiles, where you had to keep on target until the missiles impacted. Or a very limited ability to calculate velocity of the target and guess it's way to impact. I'm not certain how streak works in TT, nor do I care. The term missiles implies some ability to track its designated target and propel itself to said target, or else they would be called rockets.

edit: I also am seeing this pinpoint accuracy crap making the rounds. If you can pinpoint at max range while you're moving and the enemy is moving then you deserve the damned kill. If you're pinpoint accuracy increases because your enemy isn't moving, he deserves to die. I've watched many games from some point through in spectator mode and let me tell you that pinpoint accuracy can only be done by really good pilots/players. I've watched people miss a standing still Atlas while barely moving with medium lasers are fairly close range. Punishing good pilots is just plain wrong. For the majority of people I don't think you need to worry about pinpoint accuracy. I certainly rarely see it.

Edited by Xerxys, 25 March 2013 - 10:29 PM.

[Gman1211]

This entire topic is a joke.

Keeping in mind that video games have different forms of fun to draw players in. Some provide an intellectual stimulation in the form of strategy while other provide adrenaline packed action. Mechwarrior Online is trying to provide both, and therefore will appeal to both audiences. From a business/money making perspective Mechwarrior Online has chosen the best route to go. Because of this decision you will NEVER see Mechwarrior Online revert fully to TT values.

[Xerxys]

[color=#959595]Whoa, man... pick your pony. You can't complain about how heat is too high and then complain that the penalties for high heat aren't harsh enough. You're arguing that people shouldn't be able to just Alpha-strike willy-nilly with no side-effects, when you just argued that they should be able to do it more. This is a logical contradiction. Either you're grasping for straws, or you WANT to not be taken seriously... which is it?[/color]

[color=#959595]At least you made a FEW points I could agree with. The rest, however, you'd better do some homework on. Unlike Duke Nukem Forever, which had no public beta test, we can share the blame if this gig fails. It was our job when we signed up for the Beta to help them get this right; instead, collectively, we QQ and moan, offer little along the way of positive feedback, and get angry when it takes them more than 5 minutes to get something fixed. No, this isn't Duke Nukem Forever; if this one dies, it'll be because [/color]we helped them kill it.

I don't think the OP is saying that at all. He's certainly adamant that the heat sinks aren't working as they should, but he's also saying that the more heat you have should be penalized as it apparently is in TT. You're putting words in his mouth or you misunderstood his point. He's stating that heat was never addressed when the RoF was increased, thereby creating extremely high heat for most builds, and that double heat sinks don't work as they really should. He's stating that mechs should naturally run much more cool and that the penalty for running high heat should be reduced accuracy, mobility, etc... I can't think of any more ways to say the same thing to straighten out your view on the situation, but I hope I helped some.

You're right about this being beta and it's our job to help straighten this out, however PGI has a running record for ignoring the beta testers unless everyone is complaining about bugs that are overpowering weapons. Unfortunately for the OP, this has been repeatedly addressed and suggested to PGI and they've consistently ignored the beta testers.

They failed with the start because 10 seconds is too long to wait. The corrected this by increasing RoF. This had the side effect of assaults getting cored by the hunchback running 9 small lasers. The then doubled armor. This is the point that people started saying, wait a damned minute that's just stupid. Instead of doing that change the damage and heat of the weapons and problem solved. Just like the US government, they ignored good sense and kept on with a broken system into what we have now. A complete imbalance of the game.

I love the MW titles and the BT universe as a whole. I really do want this game to succeed, but I have a strong feeling it's going to fail. More likely it will be one of those niche games like Rifts who has a devoted fan base, but nobody else will touch it. It's not just the imbalance that leads me to believe this, but also the lack of play options, the stick figure objectives of the game modes, and honestly the constant dropping from match to match. They need to call this game MechWarrior Arenas Online. It really needs to play something more like Planetside 2. If you don't know what I'm talking about, check it out and tell me this game wouldn't absolutely rock in a play style like that.

Edited by Xerxys, 25 March 2013 - 11:01 PM.

[Xerxys]

Gman1211, on 25 March 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

This entire topic is a joke.

Keeping in mind that video games have different forms of fun to draw players in. Some provide an intellectual stimulation in the form of strategy while other provide adrenaline packed action. Mechwarrior Online is trying to provide both, and therefore will appeal to both audiences. From a business/money making perspective Mechwarrior Online has chosen the best route to go. Because of this decision you will NEVER see Mechwarrior Online revert fully to TT values.

I would like to take you seriously, but if you just look at the recent nerf to missiles you would see that your argument is already practically invalid. Less armor and damage done would also add to the intellectual game play without taking one damned thing away from the action seekers. Possibly keeping ammo the same would make ballistic players better measure their shots and provide energy weapons the chance to seek their advantage of no ammo.

Edited by Xerxys, 25 March 2013 - 07:36 PM.

[Xerxys]

Syllogy, on 20 March 2013 - 07:02 AM, said:

PGI's internal testing found that with true Double Heat Sinks, that a 9ML Hunchback could repeatedly alpha-strike for up to 3 minutes without overheating.

That is Unbalanced.

That's because PGI also increased heat capacity with heat sinks instead of just the rate at which they dissipate heat.

[blinkin]

Seox, on 25 March 2013 - 05:35 PM, said:

Don't bother, he keeps posting that it's a sim in other threads but backing off and saying it's not what he said when you point out that it's not even close.

unfortunately i can't resist beating my head against a wall when i am on the forums. i would love for this to be more like a simulator, but simulator is not a game genre. it is more like a subset or a qualifier of the game type. also there is no table top game that falls anywhere near being defined as a simulator. there are too many variables that get fudged.

[Gman1211]

Actually the recent nerf to missiles does not invalidate my argument at all. The nerf occurred because missiles were overpowered and needed a quick fix. However you will notice that missiles pretty much are no longer in use, because they are no longer effective enough to justify the weight and heat. Also good job using the double negative, if you reduce both armour and weapon damage you have essentially done nothing,and have not changed the game play at all.

[Xerxys]

Maurdakar, on 22 March 2013 - 11:55 PM, said:

OP your belief that table top rules translate even semi well into a video game is utterly false.

Firstly every decision made to balance the weapons should be done too further diversify the viable weapon selection. Introducing things that are plain better is just pointless. Since everyone will switch to the Clan counterpart. And no, clan tech wont be introduced as exclusive equipment for people who click a button to 'join clan faction'. Clanners who are deluding themselves about this are setting themselves up for disappointment that isn't how you run and develop and deliver a video game. Instead of Clan weps being better why not just different with clear advantages and disadvantages versus a standard I.S. counterpart.

Secondly game mechanics should make this game more unique than other shooters. Keeping the combat nice and slow further separates us from twitchy shooters and speeding it up only makes us more generic and CoD like. Having weapons fire faster but do less damage gives us more to do and makes for a far more engaging and interesting video game.

Thirdly you seem to be implying the TT is at all balanced, isn't run on completely different mechanics and doesn't have a completely different meta game which tries to balance it out.

Fourthly you seem to think the original material is somehow sacred. It was all made up. I suggest we make up new stuff again now if it's a good idea which is fun. How about some snazzy information electronic gear for our mechs. Like one device could force you and the enemy to target one another for a few seconds, another could let you long range scan a square on the battle-map briefly every once in a while. How about a device that shuts down enemy HUDs for a second and you can fire it in a pulse every now and then for light mech run bys. The games get shafted to non-canon anyways, treated by the worshipers of an obscure TT like it is garbage. Speaking of which as a player of 40k Battlemech is very obscure and not super popular, so maybe it should change.

Lastly I would like to direct you to a game called Mech Warrior Tactics. It is more your speed and what you are looking for I hope you enjoy it. You seem to misunderstand what this game is and expect it to conform to a 1:1 TT inner sphere MMO. This is sadly not what the game is or will ever be.

MY FRIENDS IT IS TAHME FOR YOUNGA IDEAS! IT IS TAHME FOR A SERIES WHICH WE LOVE TO BE MANIFESTED WITH THE ADVANCEMENTS IN LOGIC AND DESIGN THAT GAMERS AND GAME DEVS HAVE CLIMBED A STEEP MOUNTAN TO LERN. IT IS TAHME TO CAST OFF THE OUTDATED AND OBSCURE 'CANON' OF OLD IN FAVOR OF SOMETHING FRESHER OR AT LEAST FUNCTIONAL. IT IS TAHME FOR BIG STOMPY-SHOOTY ROBOTS TO RETAKE THEIR THRONE. AND I SAY TO YOU NOW THAT, THE OLD GUARD OF BATTLETECH CAN NOT LEAD US TO THE FUTCHA, FOR THEY ARE STUCK IN THE PAST! WE MUST TAKE OUR OWHN DESTAHNEES IN HAND. By starting a counter thread to this one. In the morning.

You're an *****.

PGI already sped everything up and did so in a mix and match way. They tripled RoF, doubled armor?, and left everything else the exact same where weapons were concerned. Everyone seems to be thinking that the OP wants a 1:1 transfer from TT and I can't argue it. What I'm seeing is a complaint that PGI keeps jerking stats around with no clear direction, reacting to problems their own stubbornness and stupidity created. I want TT rules to transfer over 1:1 because it would have been a hell of a lot better of a place to start from.

I stated earlier in a post how PGI has worked things from the beginning and it has to be taken with a grain of salt b/c I wasn't here in the first round of closed beta, but I did read their posts on the situation and it was the idea then and seems to be a recurring theme because it keeps coming up. I did make it into the 2nd so have been around for some time at least. PGI keeps making knee jerk changes that are extremely drastic and then go back the other way in the same fashion.

Lets also get things straight. A 1:1 ratio from TT rules does NOT mean they come exactly as they are written. Simply that if you do something; example triple the rate of fire that you counter balance it by either dividing the damage and heat generated by 3 as well, or you triple the armor, heat threshold, heat dissipation ect... So for you who think that a 1:1 conversion won't work, I say you're wrong. It may need minor tweaking, but it would be a hell of a lot better than these random knee jerk reactions from PGI attempting to balance the game. Also note that this latest missile patch happens to put missile damage back to roughly TT values. Are they OP, when you consider that their damage should be doing 1/3 of what is actually is, yes they are. But with the double armor it's necessary. Thus the fault lays solely on the shoulders of PGI for not listening to the beta testers.

Please OP tell me if I'm wrong with my previous posts because I'm not certain if I'm helping your cause, but it is what I've noticed in my time here. PGI started off wrong and just kept going. Is the game playable? Yes. Is the game fun? Usually. Will the game continue to hold? Nope. The simple fact is that clan tech was vastly superior to IS tech and any attempt to change from that is going to outrage many people. Even is it doesn't, it's going to break the system PGI currently has in place or be completely worthless as it's nothing beyond what we have right now. This breaks canon, lore and the game imo. It takes away from what BT is and has been. Despite all the different changes to the TT rules and the variations of playbooks, the fact that clan tech was superior stands in them all.

[Xerxys]

Gman1211, on 25 March 2013 - 10:15 PM, said:

Actually the recent nerf to missiles does not invalidate my argument at all. The nerf occurred because missiles were overpowered and needed a quick fix. However you will notice that missiles pretty much are no longer in use, because they are no longer effective enough to justify the weight and heat. Also good job using the double negative, if you reduce both armour and weapon damage you have essentially done nothing,and have not changed the game play at all.

OK. I can see what kind of mental aptitude, or lack thereof, I'm dealing with here. I said nothing about halfing the armor. Only that it should have stayed the same and damage and heat generation should have been cut to a third of value because instead of a 10 second cd you're working with a 3 second cd.

Your ignorance is your own undoing on this one ace.

Missiles are still in use, just not as effective. The ballistic weapons are the only real threat left as they do point on damage and are the only ones now. Everything else has this ******** splash damage to contend with. LRMs are pretty useless now, but my point is that PGI has finally set them ~TT values. They are under powered, but they are also under TT values now.

Edited by Xerxys, 25 March 2013 - 10:35 PM.

[Karl Streiger]

Xerxys, on 25 March 2013 - 10:33 PM, said:

Missiles are still in use, just not as effective. The ballistic weapons are the only real threat left as they do point on damage and are the only ones now. Everything else has this ******** splash damage to contend with. LRMs are pretty useless now, but my point is that PGI has finally set them ~TT values. They are under powered, but they are also under TT values now.

While I like your post for the mosts, i have to disagree at this part.
You think ballistics are too powerful. I don't think so. I think based on actual heat system, weight and critical size the large laser is the best weapon in the game.
I can deal linear damage...when i have bad aiming skill the 1sec burst help me to find the target...i can also walk my fire into the head of an enemy - and unleash the other 3 lasers in the moment i found it.

That is the problem with balaning at all... how to make it challenging for the better one but not impossible for the new ones?
At least you need different leagues...with different stats to avoid a lot of those discussions.

The next problem is - what is allready pointed out - you can not take just one weapon and balance it...you have to take all of them and balance them to each other.

And I'm sorry to say...but TT balance was broken in the moment they brought StarLeague and ClanTech.
Only GaussRifles, and ER-Large Laser that are fun to use are the prototype ones.

I really would like the first mech simulator for home pcs. rather than pure arcade.

[Xerxys]

I don't think that they are too powerful as much as they have the point on damage. They have drawbacks, but anybody with a roughly competent aim can now core you quickly toting dual AC/20s or the triple UAC/5s. The damage isn't spread like all the other weapons are, and it's a decisive advantage and the only real threat I see. I understand your position with lasers too, as I'm a huge fan of the energy weapons, PPCs in particular. If I wanted to play a game that threw around huge chunks of metal, I'd go play WoT. A dual AC/20 can core an assault mech with a few well aimed shots. I don't think they're too powerful, just that they have an advantage b/c their damage isn't spread over 4 other areas.