45 replies to this topic

[p00k]

combat is too fast? what?
compared to most other games where you can be dropped before you even realize there was an enemy nearby

there are few games where combat is this slow, where one person really can't take on 8 and still win

[Taemien]

Remember that this is MechWarrior. CoF is not a mechanic used in the Franchise. At the base you throw some weapons on a mech, aim, shoot, and kill other mechs. Thats the basis of MechWarrior. You can toy around with how weapons work (MW3 and its 53 damage AC20s, and beaming pulse lasers), or how you put the weapons on (MW4 and its hardpoint system), but you never change the basics.

What you all are looking for is Blender BattleTech (google it). It has you lock on with every weapon and determines where you hit itself. All weapons have a 10s cooldown as well. It has two forward movement keys, run and walk which affect how hard you are to hit and affect your to-hit rate.

At first it seems like MechWarrior, but you quickly find out its anything but. It is a realtime battletech-like where you have a mechwarrior's perspective.

We need to get out of this mindset that mechs are dropping too fast. Especially when we don't have all gamemodes and maps in yet. Yes, mechs are going to drop fast in close range brawls, all but one map currently is a brawlfest. There's the issue that needs to be fixed first.

Right now we have players complaining that fights are too quick on all maps but Alpine. On Alpine they complain it is too slow.

Who's right? Or are they both right and its balanced?

[Vassago Rain]

Hatachi, on 09 March 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

I didn't bring it up due to your hatred of stuff like cone of fire etc. More to do with you seem to have seething hatred if a character from canon or stock mechs of any kind etc come up.

I don't care if they have stock mechs and canon characters. I never have. I do care when every single clanner player is named Wolf, Kerensky, or a combination. I do care when stock is another word for gimp.

If we must have stock mechs, they should be worthwhile. Current trialmechs are trash, so why have them?

[Team Leader]

I can see them implementing reticule shake for jump jetting mechs in the process of rocketing off the ground, this might curb some pop tarting, however any other time is unacceptable.

[Ralgas]

Taemien, on 09 March 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

Remember that this is MechWarrior. CoF is not a mechanic used in the Franchise. At the base you throw some weapons on a mech, aim, shoot, and kill other mechs. Thats the basis of MechWarrior. You can toy around with how weapons work (MW3 and its 53 damage AC20s, and beaming pulse lasers), or how you put the weapons on (MW4 and its hardpoint system), but you never change the basics.

What you all are looking for is Blender BattleTech (google it). It has you lock on with every weapon and determines where you hit itself. All weapons have a 10s cooldown as well. It has two forward movement keys, run and walk which affect how hard you are to hit and affect your to-hit rate.

At first it seems like MechWarrior, but you quickly find out its anything but. It is a realtime battletech-like where you have a mechwarrior's perspective.

We need to get out of this mindset that mechs are dropping too fast. Especially when we don't have all gamemodes and maps in yet. Yes, mechs are going to drop fast in close range brawls, all but one map currently is a brawlfest. There's the issue that needs to be fixed first.

Right now we have players complaining that fights are too quick on all maps but Alpine. On Alpine they complain it is too slow.

Who's right? Or are they both right and its balanced?

The difference is every time someone activates a fire group or moves over some areas of terrain they are then bypassing several rng aspects of TT (pilot,shooting, and hit location rolls). It's what makes trying to balance a pc game around the system such a dicey issue (no pun intended).

Edit: I can see why people suggest this path, but as for being possible or actually effecting the desired changes i have big reservations.

The is another huge post on why this should happen for multiple same weps, but that has as many drawbacks and/or workarounds as far as i see right now.

Edited by Ralgas, 09 March 2013 - 07:00 PM.

[Zeroskills]

I am against anything that devalues player skill. If you are good enough to have pinpoint accuracy while moving at 150, you should be rewarded for it. All the RNG crap in WOT is my biggest gripe with it.

[MischiefSC]

I actually wouldn't mind a cone of fire - if it was really, really tiny. At 800 meters headshots are as much luck as skill even for a sniper. Putting 6 PPCs in a cockpit at 600 to 800 meters with pinpoint accuracy is.... well, silly.

Shots should go where you aim them almost all the time. There's a difference though with 'shooting a raven at 20 paces' and 'shooting a raven in the eye at 20 paces'.

Different accuracy for different weapons at different ranges is a powerful balancing tool. I'm against random hit locations but scaling back accuracy (and armor) isn't a bad option IMO. Currently focused fire is tied with purposefully implemented and deployed ECM use for command of the battlefield. This is because current armor being doubled to account for pinpoint accuracy makes 1 on 1 battles to slow to get settled before everyone else shows up.

I'd agree completely that it's too late for such a change though. There's potential in it, skills and modules and targeting computers and all manner of good fun stuff. Not this game though.

[Taemien]

Ralgas, on 09 March 2013 - 06:57 PM, said:

The difference is every time someone activates a fire group or moves over some areas of terrain they are then bypassing several rng aspects of TT (pilot,shooting, and hit location rolls). It's what makes trying to balance a pc game around the system such a dicey issue (no pun intended).

Edit: I can see why people suggest this path, but as for being possible or actually effecting the desired changes i have big reservations.

The is another huge post on why this should happen for multiple same weps, but that has as many drawbacks and/or workarounds as far as i see right now.

I don't personally believe boating weapons is even that effective now. For example I think the 6 SRM6 CPLT-A1 (Splatcat) is a gimped build compared to my configurations. I thought the same of the Medium Laser Hunchback back in Closed Beta. As well as the gauss cat, AC20 cat, ect ect.

So nerfing them in my opinion is redundant and needless. They're pretty easy to kill now (for me) that they don't need to be made easier.

Again I'd like to know who is right when it comes to speed of matches. Some say its too quick, some say its too fast. Assuming you can't please everyone, and everyone is unhappy, then its pretty balanced.

Personally I think brawls are at the speed they need to be. Thats a quick and dirty fight. When I play table top, this sort of battle is over in 3-4 turns when its a 4v4. Thats 30-40 seconds simulated (though the game takes 3 hours). I don't believe we should use TT as a rule, but a guideline and a sense of perspective.

An average game on a map that isn't Alpine is 7-10 minutes. Thats a pretty good amount of time considering there is no respawns and you're with PUGs most of the time.

[MischiefSC]

Vassago Rain, on 09 March 2013 - 06:45 PM, said:

I don't care if they have stock mechs and canon characters. I never have. I do care when every single clanner player is named Wolf, Kerensky, or a combination. I do care when stock is another word for gimp.

If we must have stock mechs, they should be worthwhile. Current trialmechs are trash, so why have them?

The problem is WHY they are trash.

They are trash because of issues with game balance. Too much accurate damage too quickly. If you don't have max armor in just about every location you're a fool. Weapons maximized for alpha strike use. Faster rate of fire means alpha isn't that big a deal, you can do it every 3 or 4 seconds if you've got the DHS for it. Weapons are not viable by range so much as they are viable by cycle time and projectile arrival time.

Trial mechs are crap because they're based on TT designs. Current balancing is a bit iffy still and based on concepts far from TT. Either change trial 'stock' mechs or fix balancing.

One of those is easier than the other.

[FunkyFritter]

Could work if the whole game was built around it, but it's not the sort of thing that can be added at this point.

[Mycrus]

Brilliant idea.... It makes joystickzzz and Xbox controllers OP.

[LackofCertainty]

If you wanted to implement a cone of fire I would be okay with it, but you even admit yourself that your "hold to tighten the cone" mechanic would more or less ruin rapid fire AC's, which I find unacceptable.

The biggest problem I have with your suggestion is that it hurts long range direct fire while basically having no effect on close range brawling. Enough matches boil down to close range slugfests as it is.

[Josef Nader]

CoF is a system for lobster-clawed accountants who haven't developed the hand/eye coordination needed to click a point on the screen under time duress. It's ruined better games than this one.

[MischiefSC]

Josef Nader, on 09 March 2013 - 07:44 PM, said:

CoF is a system for lobster-clawed accountants who haven't developed the hand/eye coordination needed to click a point on the screen under time duress. It's ruined better games than this one.

I'd disagree with that. The problem is that just about everyone is pretty accurate now. Hence the need to make cockpits only slightly larger than a single missiles hitbox.

The key is to make the CoF small. You can still hit a torso, arm, leg or the like at 500m with a good eye. The issue is 3 or 4 converged weapons hitting a cockpit at 800 while jumping. it also adds a useful weapon balancing factor. Currently it's hard to differentiate effectively between weapons without painfully limiting hardpoints.

[Ralgas]

MischiefSC, on 09 March 2013 - 08:07 PM, said:

I'd disagree with that. The problem is that just about everyone is pretty accurate now. Hence the need to make cockpits only slightly larger than a single missiles hitbox.

The key is to make the CoF small. You can still hit a torso, arm, leg or the like at 500m with a good eye. The issue is 3 or 4 converged weapons hitting a cockpit at 800 while jumping. it also adds a useful weapon balancing factor. Currently it's hard to differentiate effectively between weapons without painfully limiting hardpoints.

No it just adds and element of rng, and suspicion of cheating when it works too well in someones favor.
Then there's still the interaction with convergence (which would prob see aiming bugged in some form as often as not), + nothing stopping a rapid fire single shot macro using wep groupings or even something like a naga and rolling a thumb across 3-6 buttons.

Nice idea but it's not going to affect the pro's, while discouraging new players with the randomness

Edit: heard a whisper somewhere about screen/ reticule shake while jumping, would be a solid idea to stop poptart's at least

Edited by Ralgas, 09 March 2013 - 08:31 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Ralgas, on 09 March 2013 - 08:26 PM, said:

No it just adds and element of rng, and suspicion of cheating when it works too well in someones favor.
Then there's still the interaction with convergence (which would prob see aiming bugged in some form as often as not), + nothing stopping a rapid fire single shot macro using wep groupings or even something like a naga and rolling a thumb across 3-6 buttons.

Nice idea but it's not going to affect the pro's, while discouraging new players with the randomness

Edit: heard a whisper somewhere about screen/ reticule shake while jumping, would be a solid idea to stop poptart's at least

Hacks, cheats, aimbots, that's not new. Just saying it has its place like any other balancing tool.

Reticule shake while jumping isn't a bad idea at all. Boat-snipers are my real issue though. That's what pinpoint accuracy makes an issue of. I've run a 4xPPC K2 and popped cockpits out of people at 600, 700 meters. Especially across the crater on Caustic or the ridge on Frozen Colony. The problem is that it's the only time cockpit hits happen; the hitboxes have to be so small due to pinpoint accuracy that the only time you see it is on boated guns.

Still though, not all problems are fixable without introducing new problems and I get that.

[Dishevel]

OneEyed Jack, on 09 March 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

Cone of fire actually makes a lot of sense if you're able to consider it objectively, taking the fiction (which is canon), the TT and how to best represent those within a video game. I think it would have helped with a lot of issues that they instead had to alter balance to correct. All in all, I personally would have preferred it.

That said, it's just not possible at this point. Too massive a change to the basic functionality of the game.

Cone of fire makes a lot of sense. In Mechwarrior Tactics.
The problem here is that people who do not want to aim and hit what they are aiming at are playing the wrong game.

[Noobzorz]

These problems can just about all be resolved by making the SRM 6 less powerful. That is the weapon upon which your premise is based. Resolve this, and stop trying to slow the game down to the point of tedium. It's already slow, and it's occasionally so slow that nothing happens and then the game resolves without your ever having done anything. The vast majority of players I've asked hate playing alpine in anything but a light mech for this very reason.

Taemien, on 09 March 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

Remember that this is MechWarrior. CoF is not a mechanic used in the Franchise. At the base you throw some weapons on a mech, aim, shoot, and kill other mechs. Thats the basis of MechWarrior. You can toy around with how weapons work (MW3 and its 53 damage AC20s, and beaming pulse lasers), or how you put the weapons on (MW4 and its hardpoint system), but you never change the basics.

. . . more well written stuff. . .

Who's right? Or are they both right and its balanced?

If I had my way I'd say you'd be out of your ******* mind to suggest that 3-7 minute rounds were a bad thing and that anyone who enjoys alpine would probably get a kick out of running spreadsheets in EVE Online.

Edited by Noobzorz, 09 March 2013 - 08:47 PM.

[CrashieJ]

*ER MAH GERD, bullets don't go where I want it to go within a variance. BUT I WANT MORE REALISM IN MAH SIMULATION!!!*
---
yeah... I think they should add it in to some weapons because sometimes shooting a gun down a barrel tends to screw up it's trajectory in minute amounts, even on "match-grade barrels" (which can be called "lostech" here).

kinda screws with my head that the people who would walk away from firing cones and more realistic physics are the same people who cry for more "Realism" and "Simulation".

[Lightfoot]

Nah.

Add armor if you feel you must, but remember the Atlas already takes 3 heavy mechs, or 3 light mechs, or 4 medium mechs to bring down on average. Assuming they don't break off combat and all pilots are equal. If you just up the armor values that will skew farther and farther to the Atlas's advantage. Atlas used as example.

What you see in MWO is the natural scaling of skills. Players learn to pilot better and better, aim better and better. This causes players to evolve better and better tactics. Tactics that are best utilized by teams. Adding armor will only exasserbate the advantages that heavier mechs have over lighter mechs.

Players are all adapting to MWO. Attempts to neuter those skills with aim nerfs/ auto aim will result in an exodus en mass from MWO.

By the way. Adding aim nerfs is the same effect as adding armor.

Edited by Lightfoot, 09 March 2013 - 09:44 PM.