118 replies to this topic

[Royalewithcheese]

IceSerpent, on 18 April 2013 - 12:35 PM, said:

I'll give you a little hint: not all games that use 1st person view qualify as FPS games. For example, both IL2 and CoD use 1PV, but one of those is FPS while the other is not. I'll let you figure out which one is which.

Mechwarrior games are:

[x] In the first-person perspective.
[x] Games where you shoot stuff.

[Tank]

How I see all the picture:
Modern players think everything is OP, with no will or patience to get decent skill.

I come from times when games owned me for months and I say - everything is far from bad. And MWO resembles a tiny bit of that challenge.

P.S. As mentioned before, no snipers or poptarts or even ECM units ruin my game, wish I had your problems people.

[IceSerpent]

Royalewithcheese, on 18 April 2013 - 12:46 PM, said:

Mechwarrior games are:

[x] In the first-person perspective.
[x] Games where you shoot stuff.

As opposed to, let's say, air combat sims that are:

[x] In the first-person perspective.
[x] Games where you shoot stuff.

...oh, wait...

[Vapor Trail]

Pinselborste, on 18 April 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

Think he means that the rt for example would have 3 individual hitboxes with their own armor and internals each, wich would all need to be destroyed in order to disable the rt, so you cant just alpha the rt and nearly destroy it immediatly.

Soo.... once two sections of any torso (lets assume the CT) are destroyed by someone other than you. You have to look at the paperdoll to figure out what section of the CT hasn't been destroyed yet (kinda tough if the mech has ECM), remember exactly where on the mech that is, and aim for that to kill the mech.

So, do shots landing on the other (already destroyed) sections just don't count? Damage transfer from a destroyed RT to a CT, how is that handled?

And how do you assign crits for three section internals? Break the twelve crits of a section into subsections of four?

How do crits even work?... Since now I can probably fire on that cannon mount on the Atlas, and just about guarantee killing an AC20 or Gauss mounted there.

And on that subject, how is the armor divided?
Automatically? (Blow through with an alpha and kill that section).
Maunually? (Armor up the section hardest to hit heavily and be a damage sponge).

Edited by Vapor Trail, 18 April 2013 - 01:55 PM.

[Pinselborste]

Vapor Trail, on 18 April 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

How do crits even work?... Since now I can probably fire on that cannon mount on the Atlas, and just about guarantee killing an AC20 or Gauss mounted there.

And on that subject, how is the armor divided?
Automatically? (Blow through with an alpha and kill that section).
Maunually? (Armor up the section hardest to hit heavily and be a damage sponge).

weapons and armor would be assigned like now, just that they get split between hitzones,
and about the crits, things should be destroyed when you hit them, and not the random thing we have now.

[Sug]

Pinselborste, on 18 April 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

Think he means that the rt for example would have 3 individual hitboxes with their own armor and internals each, wich would all need to be destroyed in order to disable the rt, so you cant just alpha the rt and nearly destroy it immediatly.

I don't see any of that helping.

Damage transfer cancels out dividing the sections up.

[Zeroskills]

Sug, on 18 April 2013 - 02:30 PM, said:

I don't see any of that helping.

Damage transfer cancels out dividing the sections up.

I was thinking more like every section was divided into 1 or 2 large areas with a lot of armor, maybe even more than we have now, and a small section with very little armor. That way it would be harder to get to the internals unless you were a really good sniper or were close enough to hit the weak points (elbows, hips, knees, whatever) It might cause problems for shotgun type weapons though.

[DocBach]

Syllogy, on 18 April 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

When I was in the military I used to reliably get Headshots on a man-sized target up to 300m away with an open sight.

When the target is the size of a 4 story building, why is hitting a panel the size of a buss hard to do at 800m?

did you do while jumping out of a plane or while moving 100kph while the target was moving 100kph?

Edited by DocBach, 18 April 2013 - 03:03 PM.

[LordBraxton]

Syllogy, on 18 April 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

When I was in the military I used to reliably get Headshots on a man-sized target up to 300m away with an open sight.

When the target is the size of a 4 story building, why is hitting a panel the size of a buss hard to do at 800m?

[Sug]

Zeroskills, on 18 April 2013 - 02:59 PM, said:

I was thinking more like every section was divided into 1 or 2 large areas with a lot of armor, maybe even more than we have now, and a small section with very little armor.

Numbers man! Not just " a lot of armor "



My mech does a 50 damage alpha and I shoot at the RT of a mech with 45 points of armor:

Currently,

My damage goes through the armor and does 5 points of damage to the internals. If there are:

3 sections dividing that 45 armor between them (15 armor each),

My damage goes through section I hit and depending on damage transfer I might also hit the internals. If there are:

3 sections with 45 armor each then,

My damage goes through the section I hit and depending on damage transfer I will damage another section of armor.


More sections with more armor will make it take longer to kill a mech, but you could just just lower weapon damage or increase the cooldowns for nearly the same effect.

Other things you could change would be making weapons less accurate while running around at 100kph on a huge bipedal mech, or even just limiting how fast you can move your reticle. At max DPI with my mouse I can whip my mechs torso around faster than I can even see to aim.

[Pablocampy]

IceSerpent, on 18 April 2013 - 09:48 AM, said:

Jumpers are effective because there is no aiming penalty when you jump. As soon as you introduce that penalty, non-jumping snipers get the upper hand.



Stalker doesn't need to move completely out of cover - it's energy mounts in the arms are high enough for it to just hill-hump.



So, all those threads about PPC Stalkers being "cheese" indicate that they are not a problem, but similar number of threads about jump-snipers being "cheese" indicate that those are a problem? Well played, sir, well played.



Lighter mechs are already in a bad spot due to PGI's version of weapon "balance". Depending on the actual proportion to the weight you would either end up with jump-sniping 3Ds + non-jumping assault snipers or just non-jumping assault snipers. Competitive teams would include one light mech strictly for scouting purposes (i.e. find out where the other team is going so that your team can figure out a good sniping position).

If you take forum whining as a barometer for actual game balance then I don't know what to tell you. And "well played sir, well played"...? Please, your condescending douchiness is showing.

Obviously you'd set the proportion very low for light mechs, so they can still use jump jets as intended. Then turning it up for assault mechs so poptarting at distance becomes difficult without completely compromising vision.

Edited by Pablocampy, 18 April 2013 - 10:53 PM.

[Johnny Z]

plexi, on 18 April 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

The problem has to do with violating the spirit of combat in the Battletech universe more than anything else in my opinion. All aiming is handled via the Battlemech's fire control computer in universe, which results in inaccuracies when the pilot fires weapons before achieving a positive lock. But in-game, it is far too easy to concentrate fire onto a single component at most ranges, and most mechs seem to die within only a 30 second window of being engaged. Even with double armor (now practically bypassed) engagement times are tiny compared to what they should be to allow for a gradual degradation of the Battlemech (In which positioning, critical slots, and heat management can actually play a more important role)

Read some of the battles from the novels and you'll see the massive difference. Right now MWO's game play feels like just about any other shooter, but with a mechlab. It doesn't feel like Battletech, and pin-point aiming/convergence at all times is one of the issues. I'm not saying to remove it entirely, but alternatives should be looked into, otherwise we're just replicating the exact same mistakes of previous Mechwarrior games.

So far my gaming experience has been very fun minus the missing factions and such. But I like where alot of this post is going. Really hoping for a simulation not another one of a thousand shooter games.

[Aim-Bot]

Syllogy, on 18 April 2013 - 07:51 AM, said:

Aiming is OP.
Teamwork is OP.
Skill is OP.
The nVidia Faery is OP.
Fractal Camo is OP.

This is my nerf list. These must all be nerfed.

you have forgotten:

- Ballistics
-PPC
-red and blue colour
-engines
-intern structure
-HUD
-Torso twist

[bigdaddynash]

I agree with all the posts that have the most likes, because I can.

[Adrienne Vorton]

aiming is no challenge in MWO, really not. i´m against artificial difficulties like a % chance to miss, but i am for putting in gameplay elements that make aiming afford some skill...

every goddam cheap shooter has at least reticules widening while running... just saying

Edited by Adrienne Vorton, 19 April 2013 - 03:29 AM.

[Brilig]

Adrienne Vorton, on 19 April 2013 - 03:27 AM, said:

aiming is no challenge in MWO, really not. i´m against artificial difficulties like a % chance to miss, but i am for putting in gameplay elements that make aiming afford some skill...

every goddam cheap shooter has at least reticules widening while running... just saying

While I'm against RNG, and expanding crosshairs I would like to see a change to convergence.

[tenderloving]

Syllogy, on 18 April 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

When I was in the military I used to reliably get Headshots on a man-sized target up to 300m away with an open sight.

When the target is the size of a 4 story building, why is hitting a panel the size of a buss hard to do at 800m?

Just curious, when you were plinking heads were you running at the same time? Were you firing from the hip? Did you have one rifle on your shoulder and another dangling from your left hand and another strapped to your chest?

[3rdworld]

tenderloving, on 19 April 2013 - 03:45 AM, said:

Just curious, when you were plinking heads were you running at the same time? Were you firing from the hip? Did you have one rifle on your shoulder and another dangling from your left hand and another strapped to your chest?

Probably not, but he is also not a 100ton war machine.

[Fut]

Pinselborste, on 18 April 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

Think he means that the rt for example would have 3 individual hitboxes with their own armor and internals each, wich would all need to be destroyed in order to disable the rt, so you cant just alpha the rt and nearly destroy it immediatly.

That's how I took it as well.
Say the RT has 3 sections, each would have the full amount of RT Armor on them.
It would actually make it much harder to penetrate armor, as you'd have to either take out all of the sections to reach the internals, or use amazing aim to continue to punch through a single section...

[Jonathan Paine]

Simple solution: alpha strike delivers approximately 40% damage to targeted area, rest distributed to neighboring parts of the mech. Chain fire delivers precision damage, with a small delay between each weapon fired to combat macro use.