463 replies to this topic

[Vodrin Thales]

Royalewithcheese, on 15 March 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

Haha yeah. 40 points of fast, heat-efficient precision damage anywhere within 270m is a dangerous thing.

Jager is going to have at least 3 different "cheese" builds, so it's kind of funny that that guy was saying it is fine but the Cat is a huge problem.

In any case many of those that are in here railing against the evils of boating would be on these same forums complaining about the lack of choice with builds if something was implemented to stop boating. All in all we just need a little better weapon balance and all these problems go away without limiting choices when building a mech.

[Starfish McGregor]

I have no issue with boating.
Yes, coming around a corner and being face to face with a splatcat or splat stalker, or even encountering the 6 PPC stalker is not fun.
However, it takes skill to use a boat effectively, in spite of what some think. You have to think your attack run carefully or you will end up in front of several opponents...which means you die quickly (in many instances) because many boats are slower than non-boats and cannot react as fast.
If you truly want to fix a problem with the LRM/SRM boats, reduce the damage to .75 and leave the splash effect alone.
That will balance the missiles.
The other item that needs balancing is the Ultra AC 5. It fires way too fast. There should be an increase in the reload time between weapons that have fired twice. Single fire reload time and reload time betwenn the first and second shots in an "ulterated" round of fire should stay the same, but increase the reload time between uses of the cannon. After all, it takes more time to load two shells that it does to load one shell.
I have been hit 8 times by one Ultra 5 during the same time it took my AC 20 to recharge.
The shaking effect needs to be addressed as well. The Ulta 5 shakes my mech harder than an AC 20 or Gauss does.

I see no reason to add extra heat to multiple weapons. They have a set amount of heat generated per weapon (which for medium lasers is higher than TT).
Targeting systems for direct fire weapons are designed to hit one location. It is the same principle used with over and under rifles and shotguns. In a mech, you have computers to aid your targeting...which should dramatically improve your odds of hitting the same location.
What are you going to do when the clan mechs, with specialized targeting computers, come out?
If I remember correctly, about 30% of all clan mechs are a boat of some type...then add the clan targeting computer, which Gives the ability to target a specific location (other than the head) for all direct fire/non-pulse weapons.

[Royalewithcheese]

Vodrin Thales, on 15 March 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

Jager is going to have at least 3 different "cheese" builds, so it's kind of funny that that guy was saying it is fine but the Cat is a huge problem.

The really delicious part about this particular "cheese" is that two of the three top Jager builds being thrown around are basically stock variants with minor tweaks

[Gaan Cathal]

Tickdoff Tank, on 15 March 2013 - 10:18 AM, said:

Convergence to targeted mech has it's own issues as well though. It may be that it would work better, but there are still many situations where converence to target will cause problems. I do not always have my target "targeted" because I may be holding lock on a mech for LRM fire while shooting the Atlas that is directly in front of me. What about an ECM mech? convergence to target could be a buff to ECM by making it harder for a direct fire weapon to hit a mech under ECM because I can't target it.

I truly do not have an answer to the convergence problems, and they ARE problems. I just do not think that there is an "easy" fix to them.

Any convergence solution has issues though, they're unavoidable. I'd rather be able to control my convergence (targeted enemy) or, if I'm locking a different mech at least know my convergence distance. At the moment you're not converging to anything relevant unless you're so close it doesn't matter, or shooting a stationary target. ECM would be problematic, but it's widely accepted that needs some sort of overhauling anyway.

[MaddMaxx]

Gaan Cathal, on 15 March 2013 - 10:12 AM, said:

What? No, it should just mean that your arm reticule and torso reticule are hooked. The convergence system is borked beyond all belief anyway at the moment, they need a converge-to-target setup already.

But isn't that the "convergence" system as we know it. Drive straight ahead, jerk torso over to the Left, then "wait" for the arms to converge...

If the arms can be locked, no "waiting" required. Obviously those same folks don't make use of the "free look" mechanic, so I guess it is a wash for them over-all...

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Tice Daurus, on 15 March 2013 - 10:12 AM, said:

I'm going to settle this for all...

This is not a boating issue or a balance issue.

Some houses specifically built entire lances or companies with one mech with the commander of that lance or company to have a stronger mech. House Kurita would create lances of Panthers and the commander might have something more stronger like say a Pheonix Hawk or Shadow Hawk to lead them. Stiener might have made lances of Awesomes with an Atlas to lead them.

Boating or having multiples of one mech isn't a bad thing. It's all about freedom of choice.

Merc lances too:
http://www.sarna.net...r%27s_Marauders

MaddMaxx, on 15 March 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

Was that and now we know it is the Missile they carry. The "force" pilots are going to get moocho unhappy when their "splash" force is removed or toned back to reality levels.

wait if the damage splashes across locations wont that make it HARDER to kill things with screwwy hitboxes?

[Vodrin Thales]

Royalewithcheese, on 15 March 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

The really delicious part about this particular "cheese" is that two of the three top Jager builds being thrown around are basically stock variants with minor tweaks

Yep. AC2's really sucked hard in TT, but with the rate of fire adjustments in MWO a Quad AC2 setup suddenly is desirable. And replace the AC2's with 4 UAC5's and you really have a scary mech (although admittedly one with serious ammo issues).

[Silentium]

Royalewithcheese, on 15 March 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

The really delicious part about this particular "cheese" is that two of the three top Jager builds being thrown around are basically stock variants with minor tweaks

I'm not really surprised; by and large, I have found that the default loadout is generally pretty good already on a lot of mechs. I mainly upgrade other stuff, like heatsinks, structure, engine, that kind of thing to make it more efficient.

[Vodrin Thales]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 15 March 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

Merc lances too:
http://www.sarna.net...r%27s_Marauders



wait if the damage splashes across locations wont that make it HARDER to kill things with screwwy hitboxes?

In addition to the increased splash on small hitbox mechs, there also is a bug causing far less damage than intended on many light mech legs. I think he was referring to the fixing of that particular bug which will make SRM's far more effective against lights with regards to potentially legging them.

[GODzillaGSPB]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 15 March 2013 - 09:42 AM, said:

yeah my post was meant as seriouslt and non sarcasticly as yours. IE it was meant sarcastically but Im guessing you knew that and decided to reply anyways

It sounded quite serious, minus the part about actually removing the A1. But that it'd be a boat and that there would be no way to not make it a boat...nope, sorry. Those two parts sounded legit to me.

It's often a bit hard to tell on the internet (and especially for people who are not speaking English as their primary language), but then there are always the smilies who can help you out. I know that some people hate smilies and detest them. That's fine. But those people - and I'm not saying you're one of them, I don't know - shouldn't complain about other people who don't get the intended sarcasm. If it happens...too bad, but not really my fault imho.

Edited by GODzillaGSPB, 15 March 2013 - 10:33 AM.

[Gaan Cathal]

MaddMaxx, on 15 March 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

But isn't that the "convergence" system as we know it. Drive straight ahead, jerk torso over to the Left, then "wait" for the arms to converge...

If the arms can be locked, no "waiting" required. Obviously those same folks don't make use of the "free look" mechanic, so I guess it is a wash for them over-all...

That's not convergence. Convergence is a product of the 3D environment/2D interface setup.

Basically you point your crosshair at Enemy Mech A, and pull the trigger to shoot it. If your weapon is mounted vertically in line with your eyes, and we ignore vertical movement, this is simple enough. However if the weapon is mounted to the side at all, for example in a mech's arm, it has to point 'at' this cursor. However that 'at' has a depth component, constituting how far away the target is, if this depth is wrong and your crosshair is on target, the shot will potentially pass in front, or behined, the target. It's also why all the lasers in a -4P's hunch cone towards an enemy instead of all shooting out in a line, where they meet is the convergence point. Another example is missed Gausspult shots, the rounds cross eachother at the convergence point.


Currently in MWO the convergence depth is set to the distance of the first object under your crosshair. For lasers, this is all well and good, but for a weapon where you need to lead for travel time you run into problems, since your ballistics are converging on a hill that may well be 50-100m behined your target, or a building 20m closer to you. This means that even if you lead correctly, your guns shoot at the wrong depth and miss.

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 15 March 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

wait if the damage splashes across locations wont that make it HARDER to kill things with screwwy hitboxes?

I recommend reading the thread in Feedback, currently (S)SRMs are doing potentially between 5-7 times intended damage due to splash. The stated damage is the impact point damage, not the damage divided over splash area.

Edited by Gaan Cathal, 15 March 2013 - 10:38 AM.

[Apnu]

Boating is backed into Battletech. Look at the stock versions of the CPLT-A1 (LRMs and nothing else), AWS-8Q (the original PPC boat), HBK-4P (only medium lasers), an that's just in MWO. Looking at the TT game we've got:


The 30 ton JVN-10F Javelin (4xML)
The 35 ton BZK-F3 Hollander (GR)
The 40 ton HER-4K Hermes II (2xLL)
The 20 ton clan Piranha (12xMG and 2 erML, 1 erSL)
The 50 ton clan Black Hawk Prime (12 x erML)
The 60 ton Galahad (2xGR)
The 60 ton Vulture C variant (2xGR)
The 65 ton Rifleman IIC (4xLPL)

Mechs that are basically just engine: Ostcout, Locust, Cicada, Charger

I can go on if I want to keep delving into my mech spreadsheet, but this gives a quick overview of "baked in" weapon boating.

Also, every MechWarrior game I've played with human beings shows that most players are min/maxers and so usually boat one weapon system or another.

Personally I prefer a balanced mech that can fill a role (say firesupport) but also pack some kind of secondary defensive systems.

Right now I'm liking the HBK-4SP with 2 LRM15s, 4 tons of ammo, BAP, TAG and 4 medium lasers. I'm fast enough to keep up with everybody else, can sit back and lob LRMs early in the game, then move in with the MLs and contribute to the brawlers. Also its fun to surprise the enemy who thinks I'm easy prey because of the LRMs I have. 20 pts to the face at short range really wakes them up.

My point is boating is going to happen and it appears to be here to stay. So just go with it and if you can't beat'em, join 'em. In the interest of full disclosure, I boat MLs in a HBK-4P.

Edited by Apnu, 15 March 2013 - 10:46 AM.

[Rift Hawk]

3rdworld, on 15 March 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

bads complain about the mech not the pilot.

An enemy did not kill you because of his mech. He killed you because you made a mistake or he is better.

Spoken like a true **********. We so called "bads" don't care about getting killed. We care about game balance. A triple A-1 drop is a ******* I win button when its boating SRM6s. I have seen it time and time again. They steam roll over the other team. It happens about 95% of the matches I've played where 3 of these hit the field on the same team. No other mech, not even the ECM raven can claim that.

So before you call other people "bads" maybe you should stop worrying about your K:D and start worrying about the negative impact of this mech. After you master the catapult line, there is absolutely not reason to play any of them but this mech. It is the best fit, but only because it boats and takes the absolute least skill to play of any other catapult.

To those people here using canon as an excuse for boating.....**** canon. This isn't TT this is an online video game. Rules for one don't work for the other. This game should stick to canon but only as long as it does not effect game balance. When game balance starts to be effected, as it currently is, then canon needs to be set aside.

Finally, since someone linked the sarna lance post....

This is pre-clan. Since everyone loves canon so much. Which means there is little to no boating at this point. Not to mention that this isn't lance drops its random drops. I could live with boating in an 8v8 environment. I can't live with it in pubs. Most pubs are uncoordinated and 8 different people on each team. So attempting to excuse boating by saying its a lance is obsurd. Its not a lance. Its random teams full of random people.

[Tice Daurus]

Imperial X, on 15 March 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:

Spoken like a true **********. We so called "bads" don't care about getting killed. We care about game balance. A triple A-1 drop is a ******* I win button when its boating SRM6s. I have seen it time and time again. They steam roll over the other team. It happens about 95% of the matches I've played where 3 of these hit the field on the same team. No other mech, not even the ECM raven can claim that.

So before you call other people "bads" maybe you should stop worrying about your K:D and start worrying about the negative impact of this mech. After you master the catapult line, there is absolutely not reason to play any of them but this mech. It is the best fit, but only because it boats and takes the absolute least skill to play of any other catapult.

To those people here using canon as an excuse for boating.....**** canon. This isn't TT this is an online video game. Rules for one don't work for the other. This game should stick to canon but only as long as it does not effect game balance. When game balance starts to be effected, as it currently is, then canon needs to be set aside.

Finally, since someone linked the sarna lance post....

This is pre-clan. Since everyone loves canon so much. Which means there is little to no boating at this point. Not to mention that this isn't lance drops its random drops. I could live with boating in an 8v8 environment. I can't live with it in pubs. Most pubs are uncoordinated and 8 different people on each team. So attempting to excuse boating by saying its a lance is obsurd. Its not a lance. Its random teams full of random people.

It's not BS Imperial, it's how it is. If you know a certain mech is specifically being boated, I normally run mechs counter to that. Why do you think run Awesome 8-Q's so much as of late? Because I can slap on ERPPC's and hit Catapult A-1's at 1400+ meters and hit them 4-5 times for 30 points of damage before they can get into range. That's 120-150 points of damage before they can get into range and do anything. And then I can hear their QQ'ing calling me a boating PPC motherf'r, and I laugh my butt off when I tell them "But it's ok for you to boat 6 SRM-6's?" and laugh even more.

If you know what to look for, and how to deal with a specific mech in question, that's a combination of both SKILL and SMARTS.

Let them boat whatever. Let them have an entire team of Catapult A-1's. I'm cool with it. You should be too.

[Endgame124]

As a TT grognard, I dislike non cannon boating.

For example, I love 3 PPCs on Awesomes. I HATE 6 PPCs on Stalker (not in theme to the Stalker). I Love 2x LRM 20s on a catapult. I HATE 36 SRMs on a Catapult.

I would like to recommended that MWO first assigns a heat based penalty to multiple copies of the same weapon. Then, MWO assigns specific traits to each chassis that reduce this penalty

For example, lets say that each ppc beyond the first adds 1 heat to each PPC (so 6 ppcs on a mech adds 5 heat to each PPC shot). Now, lets say that the Awesome is assigned a trait that decreases the PPC stacking penalty by 75%. So 6 PPCs on an Awesome would only add 1.25 heat per shot, which would make it substantially more viable.

Now, I would suggest that the boating penalty be based on a percentage of damage or percentage of original heat (or some combination), so higher damage weapons get a larger heat penalty. With a modification like this, you don't get as harsh of a penalty for stacking medium lasers (common in many builds) as you do with stacking SRMs (not so common to see more than 2).

This suggestion would have 2 wonderful effects. 1) Less generic boating. 2) A better mix of mechs in each match - you'd see more variation in chassis, variants, and weapons if each one had a slightly different incentive to drive it.

[Royalewithcheese]

Imperial X, on 15 March 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:

A triple A-1 drop is a ******* I win button when its boating SRM6s. I have seen it time and time again. They steam roll over the other team. It happens about 95% of the matches I've played where 3 of these hit the field on the same team. No other mech, not even the ECM raven can claim that.

That hasn't been my experience. A team that sticks together and runs dedicated brawlers (defined here as a DDC, brawlstalker, or something that stands a reasonable chance of winning a close-range fight with a DDC or brawlstalker) can generally hold off splatcats. They're dangerous if they can get behind you or catch you by yourself, but they're fragile for brawlers.

[Royalewithcheese]

Endgame124, on 15 March 2013 - 11:13 AM, said:

2) A better mix of mechs in each match - you'd see more variation in chassis, variants, and weapons if each one had a slightly different incentive to drive it.

I think there's always going to be a set of the best builds in any ruleset. If we limited boating, the role of "fast heavy close-range alpha machine" might go to the AC/40 Jagermech, and people might run even fewer Brawlstalkers in favor of more DDCs. Instead of the 6PPC Stalker, ppl might run more poptarts or dualguass.

[Gaan Cathal]

Endgame124, on 15 March 2013 - 11:13 AM, said:

As a TT grognard, I dislike non cannon boating.

As a Mechwarrior fan, I dislike arbitrary anti-customisation.

[Endgame124]

Gaan Cathal, on 15 March 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

As a Mechwarrior fan, I dislike arbitrary anti-customisation.

Argh. Not a fan of every mech being an omni mech, to be honest. Would much prefer tighter reins on customization for non omni mechs.

[Tatula]

I don't think the real complaint here is boating. I think the main complaint is how fast a particular "boat" configuration can kill a mech. I mean, nobody is complaining about MG boats, or ML boats. A Splatcat can kill a fresh heavy in a couple of alphas, making it un-fun for the recipient. A 6xPPC Stalker can kill a light mech in one shot. A LRM boat can rain missiles from afar and kill a mech caught out in the open.

The point is, people will always go for the build that can kill in the shortest time. Why expose yourself to the potential danger of being shot back at if you don't have to?

With the removal of missile splash damage of the April 9 patch, it'll be interesting to see how much less effective missile boats will be.