24 replies to this topic

[Albert Cowboy Teuton]

I’m looking back on some early dev decisions… and how they currently affect the game (creating the META) the basis is that the closer the META is to the core and lore, the less it should be called a meta and somehow, it would be true to the original game (TT)
I’m not putting the devs on trial, I think they do a wonderful job and during closed beta, I submitted a question to which they answered in a very decent manner. I was worried that doubling the armor would lead to energy weapons being relatively advantaged compared to ammo weapons because the ammo was not doubled like the armor.
Today, my critique is of a different nature. What did those early decisions lead to today?
Let’s first establish 2 universal facts of shooting games:

• Kill first and you have less chance of being killed later
  
• Long range will almost always happen before short range.

That explains very well the intensive use of PPCs, Gauss and AC5/2 we see today (and LRMs before the nerf) and it’s perfectly natural to want to do it, kill first at long range. I believe the Devs did the double armor modification to prolong life and make brawlers useful. Unfortunately, it is still a better plan to “boat” Gauss and PPCs to “double” your damage at long range. The stock Awesome has 3 PPCs, with single armor, it blows through a lot and so does an AC20.
What we see now, is not 2-3 PPCs, not 1 Gauss and not 1 AC20… we see specialized builds of twice those numbers. People “boat” and they should, it gives them a quick kill. It is rewarding and killing early will make the fight easier for your team. Double armor is worked around by doubling the weapons. People couldn’t wait for the Jagger so they could field dual AC20s… what does that tell you?
Let’s suppose we go back to single armor… why field an over specialized Stalker with 6 PPCs? You only need 3 to blow up your opponent! Suddenly, configs closer to stock, closer to lore become viable again. And the META changes to being… non-META. Being the intended game right?
My position here is edgy, I’m pro stock but I can’t see how they can be realistically used in the current state of the game, with double armor (requiring or at least encouraging the use of “double weapons”) sure, you go back to single armor and you might get blown up in one shot… but isn’t that happening anyway? (oh no, not me, I torso twist and I use cover correctly you N00b!)
This is not about who’s playing better or who’s playing the right way. Its about specialized builds and is it really what we want the game to be? Thinking about it, whatever new chassis the devs bring in, who cares what it is really? Because in a matter of hours it will be min-maxed into something unrecognizable to make it more efficient. (and with good reason in the current state of the game)
I’d make the ER/PPCs have different hard point than lasers too, some variants do swap them for one another and isn’t that the point of having variants? For variety… Does the Catapult “need” 6 missiles hard points… why not 4? The stock variant doesn’t require 6 so why build it up like that? (other than the META game making it better)
Anybody sees the logic here?
PS Do I think the MGs and LB10X deserve a little tweak or boost? Maybe but that’s not my main issue.

[Randalf Yorgen]

there is another way that lends itself to stock builds and allows for the changes to armour and weapons that are in game already. Before I say it, I read your post and it seems to me that it is the custom boat builds that are giving you the hardest time and I do like your idea of the slot specific hardpoints as a method of control but I am certain many wouldn't. The other way I am thinking of is to insert some type of heat scale into the game like they did in TT.

Instead of simply hitting a certain heat point to trigger the effect have it as a time related effect. If you are running at 70% heat for 60-seconds you get the effects of running hot. For example after 60 seconds the range that you can lock onto a target is cut in half also your mech slows down as the computer tries to reduce the work load so it can bleed the heat better.

Also if you have been running hot for a while and you decide to Alpha all 6 PPCs into the chest of that Atlas the sudden heat spike could litteraly blow you appart. You internals are already hot, VERY HOT, and most likely you have taken some kind of damage. The sudden heat spike could very easily melt some of the wiring, cook some of the musculature, and slag a lot of internal structure.

The issue is now that there are no real consequences for for being a heat pig, You Alpha, use your coolant flush, Alpha a second time and as soon as possible you Alpha a third time (18 PPC's in about 10-12 seconds) and all that happens is that you shut down for 5-10 seconds and then power back on. I believe it was MW3 where if you built the Direwolf with all ERLLrs and you fired them all at the same time you would simply explode, no shutdown as the heat spike came to fast and was to much for the engine to handle.

So simply put, make heat have other effects than just shutting down and you will see many players moving towards a much more balance build. One of the first things any of the IS pilots said about the Clan Mechs when they first did battle with them was "My God, those things do not overheat" and that's an example of how bad heat mamagement should be for the IS at this time in history.

[Hedonism Robot]

While I feel you made a good point about the meta needing to align more with the "soul" of mechwarrior. I miss it being advantageous to have multiple weapon systems instead of boating one gun. I don't feel your recommended changes to removing double armor would help get rid of boats. If anything it would encourage the 6 ppc stalker even more since he would be able to obliterate an atlas then. It might be too late for PGI to change it now, but they should have had large energy weapon hard points and small hardpoints.

Changing the pilot tree for every mech variant would also be a good way to provide them a large number of easy to modify variables to keep variants relevant and balanced. I believe they could even use this to add tidbits of lore and mechwarrior feel, for instance, the Awesome was a PPC boat so they could have a pilot perk that decreases heat. For the Atlas-D you could give a perk via the pilot tree to allowing them to take a flat 5% percentage less damage to the CT.

Edited by Hedonism Robot, 15 April 2013 - 11:53 AM.

[Dirus Nigh]

As Randalf stated a more dynamic heat system would be a better solution to high heat/alpha builds. Maxing out the heat scale does cause internal damage, and it can cause an ammo explosion. However this is not enough.

Implementing heat effects into the game would go a long way to manage alpha builds and make game play more interesting. Things like acceleration/deceleration being in hindered, HUD fuzzing in and out, target data not updating, raidar range being shortened, weapon cycle times being effected, as well as other similar effects would be a great way to reinforce the simulator feel of the game.

PGI doubling the armor value was a good desision. The right compinsation for that was to add more ammo per ton for weapons, and giving individual cycle times. Heat is the over all factor that keeps the game in check.

Players should not be out right penalized for boating. The system should have a fitting consiquence for riding the heat scale. Players will always try and boat weapons. Thats how games like this work. You specialize a mech for your play style, or to fill a role in an organized team.

Double armor did not push people to boat, the want to kill in as few shots as possible, and at the longest range possible, while having the easiest method of doing so does this.

The way I see it lowering the heat value of PPCs, and large lasers made those weapons viable for boating in the numbers that are being used.

[Corvus Antaka]

The heatscale is way to forgiving in this game.

either rework the heatcap/dissapaiton or add serious harmful effects for running mechs really hot.

its WAY to easy to over-ride and live right now.

[Lege]

Stop posting and get in the game so I can shoot you with my five large lasers. Missiles got nerfed hard and now people are trying different weapons, PPCs are next up to get a nerf if people keep boating them.

[Dirus Nigh]

Lege, on 15 April 2013 - 03:17 PM, said:

Stop posting and get in the game so I can shoot you with my five large lasers. Missiles got nerfed hard and now people are trying different weapons, PPCs are next up to get a nerf if people keep boating them.

Nurfing weapons because people find them useful is not a good idea. As I said before people boat large lasers, and PPCs because they are easy to use. Maybe PGI should look at the heat values or the weapons and see how it is effecting boat builds. If it is found that they need to be raised, which I do think they should, I would not consider it so much as a nurf than a readjustment of a weapons balance.

Another reason people boat a large number of long range direct fire weapons is ECM. ECM effectively made LRMs all but impossible to use for players that did not have ECM, a well coordinated team, or playing against very new players. The hot patch "fix" to LRMs made them laughable.

It's true that there are more large energy boats sense the nurf hammer hit LRMs. However there were large energy boats before the LRMs were updated, then nurfed. Funny enough there was a better balance of LRM carriers and energy snipers before. Now its mostly high alpha snipers.

The crazy thing is medium lasers had their heat values raised because of boating fears.

[The Strange]

Albert Cowboy Teuton, on 15 April 2013 - 06:27 AM, said:

Thinking about it, whatever new chassis the devs bring in, who cares what it is really? Because in a matter of hours it will be min-maxed into something unrecognizable to make it more efficient. (and with good reason in the current state of the game)

This will happen no matter what state the game is in. It is the nature of the beast.

Albert Cowboy Teuton, on 15 April 2013 - 06:27 AM, said:

Does the Catapult “need” 6 missiles hard points… why not 4? The stock variant doesn’t require 6 so why build it up like that?

Because 6 allows you to do more damage, and kill faster.


It all goes back to your two universal truths. There is a third truth; People will find the most efficient way to kill, and use it.

Even if you change hardpoints, or scale back armor, etc., people will find the optimal build and use it.

[Albert Cowboy Teuton]

Randalf Yorgen, on 15 April 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

there is another way that lends itself to stock builds and allows for the changes to armour and weapons that are in game already. Before I say it, I read your post and it seems to me that it is the custom boat builds that are giving you the hardest time and I do like your idea of the slot specific hardpoints as a method of control but I am certain many wouldn't. The other way I am thinking of is to insert some type of heat scale into the game like they did in TT.

The heat scale has been discussed in many threads and making it too punitive will also make the learning curve horrible for new players who will only have single heat sinks.

Hedonism Robot, on 15 April 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

While I feel you made a good point about the meta needing to align more with the "soul" of mechwarrior. I miss it being advantageous to have multiple weapon systems instead of boating one gun. I don't feel your recommended changes to removing double armor would help get rid of boats. If anything it would encourage the 6 ppc stalker even more since he would be able to obliterate an atlas then. It might be too late for PGI to change it now, but they should have had large energy weapon hard points and small hardpoints.

Changing the pilot tree for every mech variant would also be a good way to provide them a large number of easy to modify variables to keep variants relevant and balanced. I believe they could even use this to add tidbits of lore and mechwarrior feel, for instance, the Awesome was a PPC boat so they could have a pilot perk that decreases heat. For the Atlas-D you could give a perk via the pilot tree to allowing them to take a flat 5% percentage less damage to the CT.

more specialized hard points would indeed help, but maybe not by size since there is already a mechanic in place for that the critical slots and weight. But by making weapon types more specific as Gauss are different than MGs and PPCs are different than Lasers... One could change their PC to an ER but maybe not a LL to a PPC. I like your idea of different XP perks depending on the original loadout of the chasis, if the stock mech is tuned to use AC10s then let it have a shorter reload time or lower PPC heat if that's what it cam with. and put those perks at the bottom to make them a no brainer. I'm not a big fan of the current skill tree, it does some good things and encourages buying different variants but I'd rather have different incentives to buy new mechs than just "needing to Elite them all"

Dirus Nigh, on 15 April 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:

Players should not be out right penalized for boating. The system should have a fitting consiquence for riding the heat scale. Players will always try and boat weapons. Thats how games like this work. You specialize a mech for your play style, or to fill a role in an organized team. Double armor did not push people to boat, the want to kill in as few shots as possible, and at the longest range possible, while having the easiest method of doing so does this.

I'm not saying boating should be penalized although fiddling with something as central to the game as heat WOULD penalize energy boating. My point was that if you can blow up a torso with 3 weapons, then why boat 6? thus the double armor issue. because you need 6 for the one shot torso kill. To bring back the Feel of the game to variants being actual variants and closer to the Lore, Hedonism suggests a skill tree based incentive to use your mechs original weapons instead of stripping and boating, more specific hardpoints would also help. You say is "how those games are played" well maybe that's what need to be addressed, change the rules to enforce a limit on customizations. Some of the most successful games in history have a limit on how customizable your character, unit or army can be. MWO could use some stricter limits to make mech variants keep their unique feel. Maybe CW will bring something to the table, like limited repair times or weapon/amo/components shortage...

[Albert Cowboy Teuton]

The Strange, on 15 April 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

This will happen no matter what state the game is in. It is the nature of the beast.


Because 6 allows you to do more damage, and kill faster.


It all goes back to your two universal truths. There is a third truth; People will find the most efficient way to kill, and use it.

Even if you change hardpoints, or scale back armor, etc., people will find the optimal build and use it.

Of course it does, your answer is solely from the player's angle, of course if you make it possible the player will use it. my point about the CAT is why make it possible at all? the Devs made the CAT this way, not the players... If as a player I can make new hardpoints on a chassis, then I'm on my way to do it right now... With stricter rules on customizations and incentives to keep the mechs "main weapons" stock this optimal build that can be achieved on a given variant might be closer to the original than it is now.

[The Strange]

All you will accomplish that way is that people will only buy certain Mechs, the ones with the most damaging weapons. You won't get variety out of it, you will get everyone running around in the same Mech.

[Cest7]

OP is right about energy weapons...

Energy weapon: Infinite damage

LRM/Ballistic: Damage directly correlates with Accuracy%*Ammo.

[Albert Cowboy Teuton]

The Strange, on 15 April 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

All you will accomplish that way is that people will only buy certain Mechs, the ones with the most damaging weapons. You won't get variety out of it, you will get everyone running around in the same Mech.

Still an improvement to what we see now. It is normal to see some chassis be more popular than others in every weight class, it would be nice to see those be closer to their intended battlefield role and use Lore friendly loadouts.

[Space Odin]

You're theory on how the metagame would change if you halved everyones armor is completely false. People would boat more because everyone has less armor. It makes boating twice as effective.

[Eddrick]

If hardpoint were limited in what can be put there. I would probably just do something very simlar to what I did in MechWarrior 4: Mercinaries. If I can't hold a ERPPC or Gauss Rifle in the slot, I didn't bother. Those are my favorite weapons. If it were limited to an extent of only being able to use stock weapon loadouts, I would just use whatever came with more then one PPC and/or Gauss Rifle. I have a sniper playstyle and don't like brawling.

[Albert Cowboy Teuton]

Space Odin, on 15 April 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

You're theory on how the metagame would change if you halved everyones armor is completely false. People would boat more because everyone has less armor. It makes boating twice as effective.

What you're saying is even if one AC20 is enough to blow through my mech in one shot, you'd still use two (for overkill?) even at the cost of heat, wasted ammo and tonnage that could be used to other uses? sounds like you have not thought this through...

Eddrick, on 15 April 2013 - 06:19 PM, said:

If hardpoint were limited in what can be put there. I would probably just do something very simlar to what I did in MechWarrior 4: Mercinaries. If I can't hold a ERPPC or Gauss Rifle in the slot, I didn't bother. Those are my favorite weapons. If it were limited to an extent of only being able to use stock weapon loadouts, I would just use whatever came with more then one PPC and/or Gauss Rifle. I have a sniper playstyle and don't like brawling.

I have nothing against snipers, I have nothing against any particular play style. I'm saying there might be a way to realign the meta to be closer to the lore and still have all those same play styles, be they sniping, indirect fire support, scouts, flankers, brawlers... but using mech builds that are closer to the Stock variants. And to me, the double armor may be the thing that need to be revised.

Edited by Albert Cowboy Teuton, 15 April 2013 - 08:08 PM.

[MasterErrant]

the primart raeson the armout is doubled is that the ghasme moves three to five times faster than TT.

[Space Odin]

Albert Cowboy Teuton, on 15 April 2013 - 08:03 PM, said:

What you're saying is even if one AC20 is enough to blow through my mech in one shot, you'd still use two (for overkill?) even at the cost of heat, wasted ammo and tonnage that could be used to other uses? sounds like you have not thought this through...
I have nothing against snipers, I have nothing against any particular play style. I'm saying there might be a way to realign the meta to be closer to the lore and still have all those same play styles, be they sniping, indirect fire support, scouts, flankers, brawlers... but using mech builds that are closer to the Stock variants. And to me, the double armor may be the thing that need to be revised.

Yes because one AC20 shot still doesnt blow through a mech at half armor. 2 shots does not instantly kill a mech at full armor either. 2 shots at half armor? That can one shot kill a few mechs. I know for a fact you have not thought this through. When you make something twice as effective in a competitive game people use it MORE not LESS. Please take your stupid somewhere a dev wont see it and accidentally think its a good idea.

[Albert Cowboy Teuton]

Space Odin, on 16 April 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

Yes because one AC20 shot still doesnt blow through a mech at half armor. 2 shots does not instantly kill a mech at full armor either. 2 shots at half armor? That can one shot kill a few mechs. I know for a fact you have not thought this through. When you make something twice as effective in a competitive game people use it MORE not LESS. Please take your stupid somewhere a dev wont see it and accidentally think its a good idea.

Maybe my example with the AC20 was a little bit too abstract for some kinds of stupid that are different from mine, but an AC20 shot will definitely blow any light mech's CT (and some mediums) in one shot. And so will the Awesome' 3 stock PPC, except even more so and please include al Mediums to the list... Even heavies can't take 30 damage in the CT at TT armor value without going internal. So if you want to pack 6 of them anyway, your only gain is maybe you'll hit the mech behind the one you've overkilled. Maybe it will give you the change to one shot a brand new Atlas because that's the only mech you'd need 6 PPCs to blow through its CT armor but that will be at the cost of much speed, heat or other payload you'll have sacrificed and that other players will now have in greater numbers because some of them maybe thinking along MY lines of stupid.

[The Strange]

I don't think most people want to play the stock Mechs, man. Part of the fun of the game is using the Mechlab to modify your ride. They also don't want to give up half of their armor and die really quickly, it doesn't make the game fun. This isn't TT, this isn't turn based, it doesn't have random hit locations, etc. This is a real time shooter game. They designed it to be fast paced; so weapons fire more rapidly, and therefore the Mechs require more armor, or it's all over too quick.

Plus, if you actually look at what you are saying, it doesn't make a difference anyway. If it takes 2 AC/20s to blow through armor now, and I have to use all my slots and weight to pack it in, then I can only fit enough equipment to do the job. If you half the armor, then I can pack 1 AC/20, some LLRS, an LRM or 2, and now I have WAY more firepower then is needed to finish you off.