468 replies to this topic

[ego1607]

So, you think it would be better if one ac40 shot could core an atlas?

[Karl Streiger]

sry but you did not see the point.
the point is the armor system is based on a system where it is totally not relevant if you are even firing 6 AC20 at once. Chances are high that a Atlas could survive are really good.

the armor points at arms and legs of almost every atlas are mostly still intact when it is destroyed.
sometimes only the CT is cored so all the armor points are worth nothing.

A more positive example is the CN9. You see them mostly without arms and side torsos.
Same system here but the hitarea size meet the armorpoints I m sure that happens more by accident.

[Mypa333]

Double armor:

We're playing multiplayer not single player. Do you expect for the game to be as easy as the single player campaigns ? If they bring down the armor, we'll only see Atlases on the battlefield and that's it.

Best example is: I'm running a Spider 5D that has 190 armor. I've got hit by an AC20 in my back and died instantly. I've also got hit by 2 LRM15 salvos that blew an arm off, destroyed my CT armor and my side torso armor and there were only 2,3 ML shots left to kill me. I got a dual gauss in my face and instantly died.

I never fight alone, never engage solo to attack medium/heavies unless I'm the only one left standing.

The ones that do have the courage to do this, are the Raven 3L pilots because they have the firepower, speed, armor and the DAMN Streaks+ECM combo.

I want to play lights not heavies that run slow.

Ignoring the Canon Stats is the way to make this game better. What's on paper doesn't compare with in game playing.
People are creative, having aiming/dodging skills. The game has a lot of things to fix but that will not happen by following the canon.

[Karl Streiger]

Here you have some average stats how many shots (not hits) you need to bring a maximum armored 35t, 50t, 70t, and 100t Mech down. The faster the target the harder - the longer it will take to kill the target. So you need 170shots with the MLAS alone to bring a Jenner down.

LLAS 74
ERLLAS 74
LPLAS 30
MLAS 127
MPLAS 45
SLAS 221
SPLAS 103
Flammer 347
PPC 58
ERPPC 58
AC2 346
AC5 128
UAC5 54
AC10 59
LBX10 52
AC20 24
GAUSS 31
MG 346
LRM5 214
LRM10 95
LRM15 55
LRM20 45
ALRM5 173
ALRM10 85
ALRM15 50
ALRM20 40
SRM2 147
SRM4 98
SRM6 71
ASRM2 130
ASRM4 87
ASRM6 62
SSRM2 116

So ignoring Cannon? Do you know what that means?
It could mean that the medium laser can hit a target even while dodging, 1sec per beam is more than enough to deal at least some damage.

Same with Streaks...you see that you need 116 shots - that don't have to be fired, to kill one of those mechs on average.
The Streaks or the LRMs are more powerful in MWO...so yeah they ignored canon here. So it make a better game?

[Pht]

MustrumRidcully, on 17 April 2013 - 02:13 AM, said:

Actually, I think battletech is ripe for a new edition with new rules that by default assumes convergence and player-selected hit locations by default.

And I don't.

Nor does anyone who I know likes battletech and/or it's lore.

It's obvious that you really don't like battletech or it's lore; that's fine.

What's odd is why you feel the urge to try and change a well-established game that people like when there are other mech/a games out there that suit your desires of virtually zero-convergence weapons fire.

I somehow also suspect you have in mind something completely different than what those of us have in mind who want the 'mechs to matter and behave like BTUniverse mechs do, in relation to gameplay and combat.

Edited by Pht, 18 April 2013 - 06:22 PM.

[Pht]

Mypa333, on 17 April 2013 - 08:30 AM, said:

Ignoring the Canon Stats is the way to make this game better.

Every time this has been done ... and it has been done in every MW game so far ... it has made for bad gameplay and lack of fun.

Quote

What's on paper doesn't compare with in game playing.

Yep. Pen and Paper games are way more fun, most of the time... if you have the patience.

Quote

People are creative, having aiming/dodging skills.

The game isn't about simulating people jumping, dodging, and aiming at other people.

The game is about people piloting their 'mechs and trying to use their 'mechs in such a way that their 'mechs can hit the targets that said people are indicating and tracking for their 'mechs.

Quote

The game has a lot of things to fix but that will not happen by following the canon.

why?

[Gogopher]

some of ur points are a bit out of date but u are absolutely correct that by ignoring cannon (and the 20+ years of collective wisdom and balancing) and arrogantly assuming that they can make a better battle tech game...well lets just say this game is flailing and failing

allowing boating and weapon groups without a significant heat cost has all but made this game a twitch shooter with no strategy...simply load up 4-6ppc's or 4-6lrms and call it a day

[blinkin]

Gogopher, on 18 April 2013 - 06:33 PM, said:

some of ur points are a bit out of date but u are absolutely correct that by ignoring cannon (and the 20+ years of collective wisdom and balancing) and arrogantly assuming that they can make a better battle tech game...well lets just say this game is flailing and failing

allowing boating and weapon groups without a significant heat cost has all but made this game a twitch shooter with no strategy...simply load up 4-6ppc's or 4-6lrms and call it a day

yeah, you can do all of that stuff in table top too. in TT there is no heat cost for boating weapons and there are many stock mechs that are built solely around that concept and the inherent cheese, like for example the "piranha": 12 machine guns that produce 0.00 heat and deal 24 damage on a chasis that goes 151 kph.

^^
@Pht: yeah totally balanced, absolutely no room for improvement here.

[Pht]

blinkin, on 18 April 2013 - 06:57 PM, said:

^^
@Pht: yeah totally balanced, absolutely no room for improvement here.

Something which I've never posted anywhere.

If you want one example, make another hit-location table to use for mechs minus hit locations, like a mech minus an arm, so it's possible to hit the "hole" that you've created by destroying the location.

Add a + to-hit modifier to make it harder overall to hit the smaller overall target to offset the obvious extreme danger of allowing people to directly attack your internals with possibly massive damage.

Like I said before, the stuff that could use improving, improve it just like the advanced rules improve the basic game without destroying the basic game.

[White Bear 84]

ZonbiBadger, on 16 April 2013 - 02:09 PM, said:

Things aren't going back to canon because they didn't work. This post is a waste of time for all involved. I think tabletop is what you are looking for OP.

Could not be bothered to read 400 posts. Agree with this.

[blinkin]

White Bear 84, on 18 April 2013 - 07:11 PM, said:

Could not be bothered to read 400 posts. Agree with this.

all for the best you shouldn't look directly at flames that burn this hot.

this is the main battle ground for the two sides that have become entrenched in their moronic obsession with either side.

people who want all table top all the time and people who have been burned out by the TT crowd and think that anything even remotely related to table top is bad.

i tried a call to reason and this is the response i got for suggesting that table top left some room for improvement:

Pht, on 24 March 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

Second - do you have that notebook? How about, instead of posting a sweeping generalization and expecting us to just take your word, you ... say ... demonstrate how what you're saying is true?

^^yup Pht you have always been the victim, you were perfectly inoccent, this is in no way intended to provoke anyone.


yeah i have fanned the flames more than a little myself.

[Karl Streiger]

blinkin, on 18 April 2013 - 11:40 PM, said:

this is the main battle ground for the two sides that have become entrenched in their moronic obsession with either side.

people who want all table top all the time and people who have been burned out by the TT crowd and think that anything even remotely related to table top is bad.

I'm really ask myself at wich side I am? Some where in the no - mans land i think...lost and bleeding

[blinkin]

Karl Streiger, on 18 April 2013 - 11:47 PM, said:

I'm really ask myself at wich side I am? Some where in the no - mans land i think...lost and bleeding

i am getting shelled by both sides as well.

it sucks fighting a two front war.

[Karl Streiger]

blinkin, on 18 April 2013 - 11:48 PM, said:

i am getting shelled by both sides as well.

it sucks fighting a two front war.

Don't tell me...

[Kmieciu]

The bottom lines is: random hit location was the pillar of TT that all the balance was founded on.
Take out that pillar and no wonder the whole balance turns into a joke.

The funny thing is, the lag-shield and hitbox bugs acted as a random number generator, especially when your ping was constantly going up and down. The fast mechs often took no damage, and you could not repeatedly hit the same spot on the slower mechs. I remember the times then LRMs and SSRMs were the only reliable weapons against fast mechs...

The Devs are gradually fixing the netcode, and in the end the only thing that determines hit location will be the players eye-hand coordination. And you simply cannot use Table Top stats with perfect accuracy!

I don't know if you played the Rainbow Six series (first three games). Those games required both a great deal of skill, and strategic thinking. They probably required more skill than any modern shooter, even tough they included random dispersion of shots. You could achieve perfect accuracy with a good weapon, a skillful operator, while standing still or crouching and taking a while to aim.
But while running or shooing in full auto, or when the operator was wounded, there was quite a lot of randomness to where the shots would land.

Edited by Kmieciu, 19 April 2013 - 12:39 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Kmieciu, on 19 April 2013 - 12:19 AM, said:

I don't know if you played the Rainbox Six series (first three games). Those games required both a great deal of skill, and strategic thinking. They probably required more skill than any modern shooter, even tough they included random dispersion of shots. You could achieve perfect accuracy with a good weapon, a skillful operator, while standing still or crouching and taking a while to aim.
But while running or shooing in full auto, or when the operator was wounded, there was quite a lot of randomness to where the shots would land.

Rainbow Six...wasn't that the game were you have spend hours of planing...and with the first move you recognized that you have missed a thing?

I have placed some question about a cone into the German Subforum:
A full skilled Mech or Pilot...could have a max dispersion of 1m per 1500m range. (maybe 2-3m for a unskilled Mech) That means standing still the weapon is as accurate as they are now. (because at that range the crosshair is bigger as the spot you want to hit)
Moving will increase the diameter of that crosshair...for each 1% on your throttle the diameter is increased.
Moving the crosshair fast will also increase the diameter.
Jumping will just double an tripple the crosshairs diameter. (For example Jumping 180° turn from 100% movement) means a increase of 700% of the diameter size.

Next you could make that the position of the weapons will affect were the weapon will hit at that crosshair.
For example the left PPC will hit in the upper left corner of that crosshair. Means you are firing for the legs of a Raven...and the Crosshair is in full size...(as big as the Raven) you have to aim for the feet.

On a Atlas you may have to aim for the center when you want to have a good chance to hit the legs with your ballistic.

I knew that devs mentioned that they used no Random Cone because they wanted to encourage skill.... if you mind that you can call something like point and click as skill....
To keep track on were your weapons are mounted and how to hit a target still were you want to hit it with a random factor in shooting needs much more skill however.

[Kmieciu]

Karl Streiger, on 19 April 2013 - 12:44 AM, said:

Rainbow Six...wasn't that the game were you have spend hours of planing...and with the first move you recognized that you have missed a thing?

I was talking about adversarial multiplier. Some people liked to "camp" knowing they would have perfect accuracy. Others liked to rush them with flashbangs and sub-machineguns on full auto.

Karl Streiger, on 19 April 2013 - 12:44 AM, said:

I knew that devs mentioned that they used no Random Cone because they wanted to encourage skill.... if you mind that you can call something like point and click as skill....

Then why did they use random cone for machine guns, flamers, lbx and srms?

Edited by Kmieciu, 19 April 2013 - 12:56 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Kmieciu, on 19 April 2013 - 12:55 AM, said:

Then why did they use random cone for machine guns, flamers, lbx and srms?

Because for every rule there is a exception?
And nobody really usese MGs or flammers for everything but trolling...mabye

[blinkin]

Karl Streiger, on 19 April 2013 - 01:02 AM, said:

Because for every rule there is a exception?
And nobody really usese MGs or flammers for everything but trolling...mabye

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

^^flamers can be incredibly useful on close range mechs, but you don't want to use them like a weapon generally.

[Karl Streiger]

blinkin, on 19 April 2013 - 01:34 AM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

^^flamers can be incredibly useful on close range mechs, but you don't want to use them like a weapon generally.

The Flammer is in my eyes even more a Anti Infantry weapon - or as you said...to disrupt visuall "sensor systems"

However...locked in a similar war... some one mentioned that the armor systems of the BattleMech are complete nonsense.
Reallizing that he is right. Look at the Background of this forum.
You see that Catapult?
Do you see all the nice details at the armor?
So how could you explain how a shot into the toe - affect the armor in the same way as a shot into the hip does?

Its the most abstract system of the original invented board game. Those ablative armor was just a 'linear' system to simulate the chance of a hit that will penetrate the armor. It was designed as a beer and pretzel game. So of course it was the most simple system. Like having hitpoints.

But is this system still necessary with all the calculation a computer can do in an instant? Is it not possible to split the Mechs leg into 17 different hitzones. Where some shots can bounce off...or deal no damage at all?