10 replies to this topic

[Solidussnake]

Since this game has just become "Alpha strike" = win. Its really just completely turned me off from the game. Not that I don't play I just play less frequently because of all the builds that just revolve around "boat or noob".

I understand PGI wants this game to be fun and wants to retain players I get that. My change of suggestion has probably been mentioned before and I'm sure I'm just ******* in the wind at this point. Because PGI has said they have no plans to consider it.

However I firmly believe it would end the boating issue and force players to actually consider weapon compliments instead of boating all of weapon A,B,C.

But basically my idea is to keep mech chassis load out similar to what they came with by introducing weapon based sized load outs.

For example. The catapult carries two MG's. Light ballistic weapons. So make the hardpoints a light hardpoint capable of holding either a MG, or AC2's.

So basically heavy, medium , or light hardpoints. For the most part it would eliminate cheese builds and keep weapon load outs balanced.

But basically as an idea a heavy ballistic hardpoint could carry an AC 20/GR.

Medium hardpoint would carry AC 10/AC5 / UAC 5/ LBX-10

Light ballstic would carry an MG / AC 2.

Large Energy Hardpoints would carry LL, ERLL, LPL or PPC / ERPPC

Small Energy hardpoint would carry ML, SM, Flamer MPL, SPL

Large Missle hardpoint would carry LRM 20 / LRM 15

Medium Missle hardpoint would carry LRM 10 / SRM 6

Small Missle Hardpoint would carry LRM 5 / SRM 2 / 4.

At least for me that would provide players the option to move weapons around. But not the option to create a weapon of just utter alpha strike abilities and keep mech's balanced and there rolls filled. It would also keep mechs in there intended canon rolls as support , assault, Jack of all trades , and what have you.

I know the idea will never be considered but at least for the most part it would fix MWO and get rid of this all out alpha or bust idea that everyone (worth there salt) constantly preaches. It wouldn't fix every chassis boating issue but would start in a right direction.

[MasterErrant]

the easy fix is to revert to the MW4 format.

[Royalewithcheese]

Does boating need a "fix?"

[FrostBear]

Solidussnake, on 26 March 2013 - 03:23 PM, said:

Since this game has just become "Alpha strike" = win. Its really just completely turned me off from the game. Not that I don't play I just play less frequently because of all the builds that just revolve around "boat or noob".

I understand PGI wants this game to be fun and wants to retain players I get that. My change of suggestion has probably been mentioned before and I'm sure I'm just ******* in the wind at this point. Because PGI has said they have no plans to consider it.

However I firmly believe it would end the boating issue and force players to actually consider weapon compliments instead of boating all of weapon A,B,C.

But basically my idea is to keep mech chassis load out similar to what they came with by introducing weapon based sized load outs.

For example. The catapult carries two MG's. Light ballistic weapons. So make the hardpoints a light hardpoint capable of holding either a MG, or AC2's.

So basically heavy, medium , or light hardpoints. For the most part it would eliminate cheese builds and keep weapon load outs balanced.

But basically as an idea a heavy ballistic hardpoint could carry an AC 20/GR.

Medium hardpoint would carry AC 10/AC5 / UAC 5/ LBX-10

Light ballstic would carry an MG / AC 2.

Large Energy Hardpoints would carry LL, ERLL, LPL or PPC / ERPPC

Small Energy hardpoint would carry ML, SM, Flamer MPL, SPL

Large Missle hardpoint would carry LRM 20 / LRM 15

Medium Missle hardpoint would carry LRM 10 / SRM 6

Small Missle Hardpoint would carry LRM 5 / SRM 2 / 4.

At least for me that would provide players the option to move weapons around. But not the option to create a weapon of just utter alpha strike abilities and keep mech's balanced and there rolls filled. It would also keep mechs in there intended canon rolls as support , assault, Jack of all trades , and what have you.

I know the idea will never be considered but at least for the most part it would fix MWO and get rid of this all out alpha or bust idea that everyone (worth there salt) constantly preaches. It wouldn't fix every chassis boating issue but would start in a right direction.

Agree on your idea, i and Tigridor made a similar post, but abit different, cause of the boating, balance problem, with lot of other ideas, maybe you like to read it, its a wall of text, but out of the reason, everyone understands the balance factor in it too, specially to make differences between mechs, factions (IS vs Clan) i link it, maybe you like to vote on it and share your opinion, and every one else too. But keep it constructive,and look behind the wall, not only at it.

Greets FrostBear

http://mwomercs.com/...effekt-for-mwo/

[Solidussnake]

Royalewithcheese, on 27 March 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Does boating need a "fix?"

Boating needs to be eliminated Else all you are going to see is the cheese builds you see now.

[Hubis]

The easiest way to fix it would be to have each DHS add 1 heat to capacity, rather than 1.4 heat as it does now. High heat mechs like SRM or PPC boats rely on DHS to maintain a reasonable rate of fire, but also to raise their heat threshold enough to be able to alpha-fire without shutting down. Since DHS take more crit slots you cannot fit as many of them, and so a mech using DHS instead of SHS will not be able to alpha-fire nearly as large of a burst (though they'd still be able to chain-fire if they wanted). This is a good compromise, IMO.

[Peiper]

I've made up similar posts/suggestions in the past as well. Mech hardpoints should be reflected, or be a reflection of the physical appearance of mechs. They did this with the AC20 cats, finally, though my suggestion was to make the big guns on the K2 'big gun' hardpoints for PPC's, Gauss and AC20s, where the machine gun/medium laser slots would be for small guns, like machine guns, AC/2s, small and medium lasers.

I'm not a fan of boating. I know that gamers, because they are who they are, will figure out how to min/max to the best of their ability. As long as MWO allows them to do that, they will continue to do that. However, I don't think that allowing them to do SO MUCH customization as to create mechs that would normally never be built outside of solaris, is necessary for the longevity of the game. It's kinda weird. There are HUNDREDS of mechs, many with many different variants already in the Battletech universe. There is a mech for EVERY play style out there. We're seeing, as we get more and more mechs released in MWO that each of the various roles is being filled by all these various mechs in their stock builds already. And those stock builds are already balanced. Yeah, they're all flawed, but they all have their strengths as well.

So, I agree with you. If the community can't, or isn't allowed to balance themselves (through lobbies, arranged fights) then the game itself must be built with regulations and safeguards to prevent the players imbalancing things to the detriment of the greater game.

[Aim64C]

I think a MW4-esque system would be appropriate to keep mechs within their respective personality while enabling a little bit more flexibility in adding smaller armaments. I should be able to add a couple medium lasers to a spot where I have a friggin' PPC, not just be arbitrarily limited to one energy weapon.

That said - "boating" is not really a problem. If you haven't noticed, a lot of BT designs place a focus on a particular weapon system or another. The Catapult focuses on missiles (as well as mechs like the Longbow, Yeoman, etc), The Jenner focuses on lasers (particularly the Foxtrot).

[SerEdvard]

As has been mentioned in other threads, boating/alpha striking can be fixed indirectly by making adjusting the heat scale for SHS vs DHS. Right now, there is essentially no reason to use SHS instead of DHS because DHS are strictly superior to SHS. The high heat capacity of DHS encourages boating, as there is no reason to chain fire when you have both high heat dissipation rate AND high heat capacity.

The fix for this is to keep the high dissipation rate of DHS but reduce their heat capacity, while also increasing the heat capacity for SHS. Thus the boater/alphastriker has a dilemma... do I use DHS for to dissipate the vast amount of heat generated with each alpha strike but risk an immediate shut down? or do I use the high-capacity SHS so that I can alpha strike a couple times back-to-back but then have to wait longer to cool down?

[Nankam]

I don't agree with the premise of all these anti-boating threads that high alpha mechs dominate the game. There are currently two viable paths for mech building: high alpha builds, and high sustained dps builds. The best way to achieve a high alpha is to boat high damage energy weapons, resulting in high heat generation. Sustained dps is achieved by having either a varied weapons loadout or a low heat, low alpha ballistic weapons load out, which permits for a close to heat neutral or heat neutral mech.

Personally, I have never liked the high heat, high alpha mech building philosophy as it just doesn't fit my play style. I also have never found myself to be at a disadvantage in a high sustained dps mech. Success is merely a matter of recognizing your mechs strengths and weaknesses, and adjusting accordingly.

For instance, you shouldn't pop over cover and trade blows at the beginning of a game with a ppc jump cataphract or ppc stalker if you don't have the alpha to return the hurt. Instead, you should be patient and use cover until the game develops past the sniper stage. There is a point in every game where mechs from both sides close in on each other, and it is at this point where the advantage switches over from high alpha mechs to high sustained dps mechs. At shorter range boating mechs simply don't have the time to cool off fast enough, and can't hide behind cover if you and your team maneuver smartly.

I don't find anything wrong with boating as it's merely an alternative strategy to high dps, and while an advantage in some game situations, it is a disadvantage in others. The key is to know your mech's strenghts and weaknesses, and then make decisions in game that maximize the number of times your mech is in a situation it is good at and minimize the ones it is bad at.

Edited by Nankam, 29 March 2013 - 05:38 PM.

[Aim64C]

Kind of on the topic of what Nankam was talking about...

I don't really see many of the "high alpha" builds being all that effective in the game. You're putting a lot of hope and faith into the few windows you have to make a shot.

Though, honestly, I find "DPS" to be a relatively useless concept in dynamic games like this. For you to actually -do- damage, you must be hitting your target. That depends upon your target, your weapon, and your own mech (as well as other factors like cover).

What matters most is that you are able to actually hit your target, consistently, in a manner that deals an appropriate amount of damage where you need/want it. I had some success with a Jenner "boating" small pulse lasers instead of medium lasers. It came with some drawbacks that I'm not sure were ultimately worth it - but the higher refire and better concentration of damage was nice.

It might not have been able to put out damage like a jenner with medium lasers - but it seemed to be about as effective at coring things. Particularly targets that are harder to track with medium lasers.

Of course... it was absolutely useless at any meaningful range....