103 replies to this topic

[FrostBear]

Quardak, on 11 April 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

What do you think of the actual PPC-Wave?

Now every game is full of PPC-Carrier in various way (last Match: Raven 2x with 1x ER-PPC and 1x PPC !!!)

->Sniper ftw ?

Nope, everyone uses them, cause, emp effect for ecm. And hardhitting boatgun atm. The Awsome is a ppc boat, was, and should be. But now even Spiders carry them, yeah, Arcade Game in purest forms. Hope, some day, they will change things, so MWO becomes again a Mechsim, with tactical fights, strategie, and yes brawls to, but not with so massive brawl boats.

Recently i watched, an interview from Heavy Gear Assault, purely Arena based game, damn good ideas. Thats were boats would be damn nice, on Solaris Arena. I guess, most Pro Boatplayers wich like skillbased hard fought Mechfights, will go over to HGA, cause there they have their, style of play favored. Sad, cause MWO could really become so damn big, with this 3 Faction variants in it, wich feel complete different, in playstyle, and loadouts.

Maybe, they will make it some day, maybe not, cause are forced to get masses of players cause the publisher needs the money.

I say, with this, over time they would get lot of players, and players spending money, cause have lot to do, and to fight for. All good ideas can be inplemented in this idea, and have it still balanced.

But only my opinion.

Edited by FrostBear, 12 April 2013 - 05:20 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Quardak, on 11 April 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

What do you think of the actual PPC-Wave?

Now every game is full of PPC-Carrier in various way (last Match: Raven 2x with 1x ER-PPC and 1x PPC !!!)

->Sniper ftw ?

You mean JUMP SNIPER..

I'm little disappointed that there is no picture at the I-net....showing a Sniper in full ghillie suite....waiting hours for the target...motionless....and then when he see the target jump out of cover into the air an land a perfect head shot.

Stupid that it is possible

[Randomerlight]

Excepting SSRM boats (splat cat, for example), I'm sort of questioning the overpowered nature of boats here. I rarely find that boating is an issue, if ever, excepting the overpowered nature of streaks. Do they really hold that much power over a battle?

Here's an example. I'm mostly a light pilot. I play primarily a 2X with a mixed range of weapons. I roll with one or two other lights generally in a lance. We ran into an AWS not two days ago boating PPCs. The pilot had effectively decided that he/she shall be ineffective at short ranges, and we ran right up to them and killed them on the spot, no questions asked.

There are plenty more examples where a boat has similar issues. Want to boat Medium lasers? Be prepared to have terrible long range and overheating issues. Boat LRMs? Get ready to be wasted from close range. I'm simply not buying that the hardpoint system is the largest issue with the gameplay system, or leads to kills. You know what gets me killed? My stupid decisions or a incorrectly maneuvering team, that's what.

Now, will this pose a problem for Omnimech introduction? Only if you're truly concerned with lore. But I don't recall boating being something the Clans did ever, so it's not even a question of whether clans can boat or not.

You know what made Omnimechs more effective? All of their weapons systems were "improved" versions of the same IS technology. Star League tech +1. So you have an ER Laser that has a higher range and higher damage. If your chief concern here is balance between Omni and IS, there's where you achieve your differentiation. Clan tech is simply better tech.

Edited by Randomerlight, 12 April 2013 - 06:59 PM.

[Karl Streiger]

The pro's and con's of a boat was discussed several times... in my opinion the con is only - find the weak spot.

That means...charge a Mech with PPCs only... or keep distance at a Infighter - stay in team focus fire. However these are all things that have to be a general concern not only fighting boats.

FrostBears initial idea could be derivated to:
give IS the armor
give Clan the weapons.

No modification of structure or armor may result in that the Hellbringer is equal to the Catapract with STD
The first has the better guns, the second is more durable

[Agentpony]

Vote Abstain.

I think the idea to restrict loadouts has some merits, but I think the presented way is far too complicated and in many ways restrictive.

I´d personally rather favour a system that goes by weapon "impact", rather than weapon type. For example, have a mech with 3 energy HP, but it cant have more than one "big impact" energy weapon (PPC for example), and 2 more "low impact" energy weapons (medium laser etc.). Alternative easier but less varied method: high impact weapons consume 2 weapon slots; so the 3 energy HP Mech can only carry a PPC and one more energy weapon in that area.

One could also think about a maximum "firepower" limit. A given Mech has 100 firepower maximum. Adding a high impact weapon like a PPC will give,say, 20 firepower. Adding a second PPC will add 20 more firepower PLUS 50% on top (so we´re at 20+30=50 firepower now). A third PPC would give 20+(50%+100%). So 3 PPCs have 20+30+50=100 firepower, maxing out this given mechs firepower limit, regardless of tonnage left. If the player went with three different "high impact" weapons (say PPC, ER Laser and an AC10) it would only give 20+20+20, leaving 40 more firepower to fill. (these are just arbitrary numbers to demonstrate the concept)

Different Mechs and different variants thereof will deliver varied firepower limits and/or high/low impact hardpoint restrictions. The choice of engine could also have an impact; a heavy engine may give a higher firepower lmit but through its nature lower available tonnage. Clan Omnimechs could be special in giving higher comparative firepower, but also higher penalty for stacking the same weapons - or the other way around, lower firepower limit but less penalty for stacking same weapons.

The point of both systems is to leave customization options largely intact, yet prevent loading too much of the same weapons. This is just a rough, quick idea, the basic aim of all is, for me, a varied loadout is harder to play and should therefor have a certain hard bonus.

Tigridor, on 03 April 2013 - 06:58 PM, said:

....

here is a little last think to read!!!!
From Chris Roberts

Publishers are useful in the old physical distribution world, but the Internet is the great equalizer. [...] But we want to build a PC game and publishers increase costs because of their need to recoup their sizable overhead cost. We want to make sure all the money raised goes directly to the development of the game. ...

I know that Chris Roberts quote touches many gamers in all the right spots, but it is not exactly relevant outside of his bubble. It portrays it as if publishers were only there to siphon off revenue. It also ignores that even without a publisher, a games developer will ALWAYS have to work towards being profitable over being "artistically free". Third, it claims that without a publisher, all the money goes into game development - he should know better. There are things publishers do, from marketing to QA to accounting etc. that HAS to be done, and if the publisher doesnt do it, the game studio has to do it themselves - the costs of these things are inevitable. Fourth, it completely denies that anything good for the health of the game can come from the "corporate suits", which is as simplistic in the game world as it is in any other business. It was the "corporate suit" side of Steve Jobs for example that made Apple the company it is today.

One of the "most hated" publishers might be EA. Yet there are studies that show the metascores of EA games to be higher than average. So they must be doing something right. LoL/WoT/Minecraft may have millions of accounts. that says nothing about how many active players there are. All the publisher free internet distribution does is decrease overhead costs a bit. It does NOTHING to directly improve a games´ quality.

There are two main reasons why Chris Roberts´ project is so well received. First, a dearth of high-profile space sims. But second, the incredibly good name Chris Roberts has because of the hugely successful Wing Commander universe - developed and made successful through a publisher, even if it was the same company in this case.

Edited by Agentpony, 15 April 2013 - 01:37 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

Agentpony, on 15 April 2013 - 12:23 AM, said:

One could also think about a maximum firepower limit. A given Mech has 100 firepower maximum. Adding a high impact weapon like a PPC will give 20 firepower. Adding a second PPC will add 20 more firepower PLUS 50% on top (so we´re at 20+30=50 firepower now). A third PPC would give 20+(50%+50%). So 3 PPCs have 20+30+50=100 firepower, maxing out this given mechs firepower limit, regardless of tonnage left. If the player went with three different "high impact" weapons (say PPC, ER Laser and an AC10) it would only give 20+20+20, leaving 40 more firepower to fill.

Oh...i haven't seen this idea before. I like the concept. Some will call it limitation but it is...awesome.
Not only for High Impact Weapon but for every weapon.
Although a fast cross check shows that you have to consider range and heat per shot too.
Because with similar system - the cannon HBK-4P would generate a firepower of 267. 6 stacked Medium Laser in Torso and 2 stacked Medium Laser in the Arms.

EDIT:
OK i have taken this idea... squeezed the average damage per 100m range band from 100 to 2100m.
Resulting in a damage value of 6.25 for ER-PPC or 1.05 for MLAS and 10.45 for gauss.

using following formula:
y*(1+x¹+x²+…+xⁿ)
with y is the base damage
x is 1.5 because of Agentponys idea
and n is the numbers of weapon for that crosshair

For example 2 mlas in arm and 2 mlas in torso will result in 2.65+2.65 firepower

With that the Hunchback 4P will have a firepower of 24.645
The K2 stock would have a firepower of ~ 13.5
The K3 (ERPPC) may have a fire power of ~ 18.75

If you accept that a mechs targeting and tracking system is able to handle 150% of his stock armament. The maximum weapon loadout for a K2 could have a maximum fire power of ~20.5

Edited by Karl Streiger, 15 April 2013 - 01:44 AM.

[Agentpony]

Glad you like the concept. Dont take the numbers at face value, it was just quickly thrown together to illustrate the idea. Extreme variants like the 4P would definitely pose a balance challenge, but I think one can factor that in.

The firepower value of any weapon should of course encompass several variables, including DPS and impulse length. Range could be a flat modifier, low/medium/high range with a x0.9/x1/x1.1 variable etc. Heat is PROBABLY not so important, because heat in my mind is the "ammunition" of energy weapons. Or, let heat sinks add to the firepower as well. In the end, the lacking heat effects are a separate problem in the game anyway. Again, its just a rough draft.

I agree that some people might call it a limitation. But what alternatives do we have?
1. Keep the boating/high alpha builds
2. constantly buff and nerf the flavour-of-the-month weapons
3a. Make a rigid limitation as presented in the original post, forcing a varied build
3b. Make a fluid limitation of which my concept is just one example, encouraging a varied build

Edited by Agentpony, 15 April 2013 - 02:00 AM.

[Jam the Bam]

I like the idea, have been thinking of a very similar thing myself, but I was thinking of restricting the hardpoints to certain critical spaces, for example:

what was originally a medium laser slot could be restricted to maximum 2 slots or something similar, would prevent ridiculous loadouts, but then again wouldn't have done anything about the splatcat.

I agree that something along your lines would be a great balancing factor.

My main reason for liking it would be that it would give each chassis more of a purpose, restricting which chassis are capable of certain playstyles and therefore making the addition of many more mechs much more viable to fill the gaps left.

[FrostBear]

Jammerben87, on 15 April 2013 - 03:37 AM, said:

I like the idea, have been thinking of a very similar thing myself, but I was thinking of restricting the hardpoints to certain critical spaces, for example:

what was originally a medium laser slot could be restricted to maximum 2 slots or something similar, would prevent ridiculous loadouts, but then again wouldn't have done anything about the splatcat.

I agree that something along your lines would be a great balancing factor.

My main reason for liking it would be that it would give each chassis more of a purpose, restricting which chassis are capable of certain playstyles and therefore making the addition of many more mechs much more viable to fill the gaps left.

Agree on your idea to, why not it could be fit into this system, as i said lot of times, its tweakable, and lot of the good ideas can be put into it, so we can prevent extreme boating, and also leave boating in the game, but to the Clans as they have also drawbacks on their chassis. Pls Folks, think of it openly, simply try to see whats behind it and the big picture it will create for all of us.

FrostBear

Edited by FrostBear, 20 April 2013 - 06:00 AM.

[FrostBear]

Agentpony, on 15 April 2013 - 01:57 AM, said:

Glad you like the concept. Dont take the numbers at face value, it was just quickly thrown together to illustrate the idea. Extreme variants like the 4P would definitely pose a balance challenge, but I think one can factor that in.

The firepower value of any weapon should of course encompass several variables, including DPS and impulse length. Range could be a flat modifier, low/medium/high range with a x0.9/x1/x1.1 variable etc. Heat is PROBABLY not so important, because heat in my mind is the "ammunition" of energy weapons. Or, let heat sinks add to the firepower as well. In the end, the lacking heat effects are a separate problem in the game anyway. Again, its just a rough draft.

I agree that some people might call it a limitation. But what alternatives do we have?
1. Keep the boating/high alpha builds
2. constantly buff and nerf the flavour-of-the-month weapons
3a. Make a rigid limitation as presented in the original post, forcing a varied build
3b. Make a fluid limitation of which my concept is just one example, encouraging a varied build

Agree with you, also a good idea, and would also fit into the idea we had, good ideas can be patched together into a good balanced system, that also make differencies in the factions and the gamestyle, so everyone finds his/her likings. As Karl also thought about your idea, i also did, and i like it too, would be nice.

[Rogue Jedi]

not a bad idea, but what would happen to the current Mech configurations?

would this be implemented and all chasis be stripped of weapons that are in the wrong place?

some players would not like having to reconfigure every mech, because they are not configured as designed, and for example you have mastered a type of Mech then sold off all but one model, you then find that one model can no longer carry your prefered loadout but another variant can, that would not be fair.

the only even remotly fair ways to implement that system are:

1) make this applicable to all mechs purchased after a certain date, however this would allow the current configurations including boats to remain, and be modified

2) it applies to all future upgrades after application of the patch, the existing configurations can stay but if you remove a weapon/peice of equipment that does not fit you cannot refit it

3) Perform a reset, then refund all xp and GPX as gpx and all MC and Cbills spent, to allow people to purchase sutable replacement Mechs

[ArmageddonKnight]

Epic wall of text, i fully read most of it but did skim read some of it lol . Anyway i got the jist.

As u said its just a rough idea so i wont go picking holes in it, all u need to know is i suport the overall idea behind this sugestion.

Voted Yes

Boaters will hate this idea, and thats about it, so ull know who they r

For the above post: The idea is that the current mech loadouts, atleast the idea behind said loadout sstays the same. It's just that the 'size' of said hardpoint will be put into context of what the mech was made for.
So yes if u had 4 PPC's or 5 LArge Lasers bolted to ur energy hardpoints, then yes its likely that wont work no more, but thats the point, it would likely end up being that 2 or 3 of those energy hard poitns r meant for smal land medium energy weapons and only 1 or 2 is for large energy weapons.
one of the Awesome varients for example is designed to run with 3 PPC's , u can tell by the look of the damn thing, so that would still be a mild PPC boat, the Stalker though, that by its looks is meant to be a Missle and Laser mech ..not a 6PPC or 4PPC + laser boat. So yes if this was implimented some peoples loadouts may not work, but mainly only those loadouts that this idea is here to stop ..that being heavy boating.

Edited by ArmageddonKnight, 22 April 2013 - 12:22 PM.

[FrostBear]

Rogue Jedi, on 21 April 2013 - 07:47 AM, said:

not a bad idea, but what would happen to the current Mech configurations?

would this be implemented and all chasis be stripped of weapons that are in the wrong place?

some players would not like having to reconfigure every mech, because they are not configured as designed, and for example you have mastered a type of Mech then sold off all but one model, you then find that one model can no longer carry your prefered loadout but another variant can, that would not be fair.

the only even remotly fair ways to implement that system are:

1) make this applicable to all mechs purchased after a certain date, however this would allow the current configurations including boats to remain, and be modified

2) it applies to all future upgrades after application of the patch, the existing configurations can stay but if you remove a weapon/peice of equipment that does not fit you cannot refit it

3) Perform a reset, then refund all xp and GPX as gpx and all MC and Cbills spent, to allow people to purchase sutable replacement Mechs

Yes it would be needed to refund your cbills, and or to stock all your equipment back into storage, and reasign it to your mech as it fits now, sure some work my friend, but, then youve done it and go out on the fild, you wont get onehitted by a 2 ac20 jager, or a 6 ppc stalker, or a 6 srm caty, and now one would cry to tripple armor, fights would last longer again, and the game would be agein mechwarrior, and not counterstrike in metalsuits were you die in one sec, ok 2 sec...
I think, its worthe little work in the machlab for that? ;-)

Edited by FrostBear, 22 April 2013 - 01:07 PM.

[FrostBear]

ArmageddonKnight, on 22 April 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

Epic wall of text, i fully read most of it but did skim read some of it lol . Anyway i got the jist.

As u said its just a rough idea so i wont go picking holes in it, all u need to know is i suport the overall idea behind this sugestion.

Voted Yes

Boaters will hate this idea, and thats about it, so ull know who they r

For the above post: The idea is that the current mech loadouts, atleast the idea behind said loadout sstays the same. It's just that the 'size' of said hardpoint will be put into context of what the mech was made for.
So yes if u had 4 PPC's or 5 LArge Lasers bolted to ur energy hardpoints, then yes its likely that wont work no more, but thats the point, it would likely end up being that 2 or 3 of those energy hard poitns r meant for smal land medium energy weapons and only 1 or 2 is for large energy weapons.
one of the Awesome varients for example is designed to run with 3 PPC's , u can tell by the look of the damn thing, so that would still be a mild PPC boat, the Stalker though, that by its looks is meant to be a Missle and Laser mech ..not a 6PPC or 4PPC + laser boat. So yes if this was implimented some peoples loadouts may not work, but mainly only those loadouts that this idea is here to stop ..that being heavy boating.

Yes thats the idea behind it, to prevent extreme boating, on the clanside you have the option, but also the drawback, its a game and also in real life, damn you have to sacrifice something if you modify your car, or a T-80 tank. The extreme boats would fit into a solaris arena, were all mechs are: Pimpmymech Mechs, open tuned babys for hard fights, the real proboaters as i allways say, would find there they hard competitive build fights. And PGI can stream that to make us crazy about who will become champion. Like Heavy Gear Assault trys to make, it, and i guess, most skilled boatplayers will go over there, cause there they have the big arena and spotlight, wich MWO could make also, and make this game freaken awsome over time. But not if they simply let it run at this point, we will see how they try to balance, the Clans in comparison to the Innere sphere faction. If they try like with ecm and ppc...this will come some day to a deadend...Sadly.

Edited by FrostBear, 22 April 2013 - 03:01 PM.

[Tigridor]

after weeks and weeks nothing change, every match boating one klick boom,
crazy!!

with this idea we will give back MWO the spirit of Bettletech and not a game like Advenced Mechwarrior online boating warfare, or Call of boatingwarrior 1 klick boom Duty!!!!!

[Hellcat420]

yes the problem is the fact that all mechs are omnimechs in this game. the bigger problem is there are too many noobs who play that like it that way, because the game would be too hard for them if they had to actually use the mechs in the roles they were made for.

[Smk]

Gallowglas, on 25 March 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

The easy, no-nonsense solution for IS/Clan balance is numbers. 12 IS versus 9 Clan, for instance.

12v9 doesn't make sense. 12v10 does because that's a clan binary vs a IS company. Just throwing out random numbers is just as likely to **** people off as it is to fix anything.

[Tigridor]

Push this Idea!!

[Tigridor]

after weeks and weeks! many good ideas in the Forum!!
But nothing will change.

ok! here a bit from the idea




LR HP (LRM Hardpoint) = All LRMs fit here only
SR HP (SRM Hardpoint) = SRMs and Streak SRMs fit here only
SE HP (Small Energy Hardpoint) = Smalllaser, Smallpulselaser, Medlaser, Medpulselaser fit here only
HE HP (Heavy Energy Hardpoint) = Largelaser, ER Largelaser, Largepulselaser, PPC, ERPPC fit here only
AC HP (Autocannon Hardpoint) = AC2, AC5, UAC5, AC10, LB10X fit here only
AsC HP (Assaultcannon Hardpoint) = AC20, Gauss fit here only
NARC HP (Narc Hardpoint) = Narc launcher fit here only
AI HP (Antiinfantry Hardpoint) = MG, Flamer fit here only
EL HP (Electronic Hardpoint) = ECM, TAG, BAP fit here only (Tag cause, its no weapon, no heat, no damg, only a laser to guide Missiles)
The EL HP system can be tweaked by you as you wish, its only for showing you the use.
AMS HP unchanged


so well !!!!!!!!! reed and vote.

[Tigridor]

Nice!