60 replies to this topic

[Inertiamon]

I really miss MWLL BA.

[Ragor]

Inertiamon, on 25 April 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

I really miss MWLL BA.

Different game concept here.

MWO is pure mech combat.
MWLL was combined arms.

And me personally misses BA as a unit but not as BA ejecting pilots.
I always disliked the concept of Mechwarriors, wearing a fullscale BA inside the cockpit.
(This was for me the biggest design fail of MWLL. Besides the coolant flush and the default respawn matches. (I hate respawn gamemodes with all my guts.)
But I really miss SA gamemode with Duncan Fisher.)

But opinions may differ and that is fine.

Edit:
Damn, and I miss the tanks and VTOLs of MWLL. And the ASF as food for my Huit prime.
And the Harrasser A with the light gauss was always nice to troll people.^^

Edited by Ragor, 25 April 2013 - 08:10 AM.

[MasterErrant]

I thbink some of this is worthy of the devs attention.

[Ryokens leap]

I learned that glowing energy weapon barrels are lame.

[Victor Morson]

I have a big one.

MWLL: NARCs are given tracking and go out to 1000m, and last quite a while or until blown off.
MW:O: NARCs are dumbfire, don't last very long and require you to get point blank in someone's face.

End result? NARCs = Awesome in MWLL and completely horrendous in MW:O.

[Hellcat420]

Inertiamon, on 25 April 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

But alright - say it's all apportioned correctly and it's costing quarter of a mill to pump out the likes of Alpine.

It frigging shouldn't..

that is the price you pay for poor management.

[BoydofZINJ]

Troutmonkey, on 24 April 2013 - 10:11 PM, said:

These are all good ideas. I fully support them.

I still don't know what MWLL is though..

Mechwarrior: Living Legends (MWLL) is a total conversion mod for Crysis Wars. We have already assembled a dedicated team of over 40+ members from various gaming development backgrounds, all of whom either eagerly await projects or are currently hard at work on all the assets that are to be imported into the game; from BattleMechs to player models, ALOT is always happening with the MWLL team.

Essentially it is a MechWarrior (Battletech) MOD

[Davers]

Phalanx100bc, on 25 April 2013 - 06:38 AM, said:

Never understood why PGI never reached out to any of those guys....seems like a good talent pool to draw from. I'm sure most of those guys have real jobs now and much less free time on thier hands.

PGI is hiring. If the MW:LL guys were interested they could apply.

@OP
While the spread of the LBX should be tightened up, what you are describing would be far superior to the AC/10, and the chance for TACs would make it possibly better than any ballistic currently in game.

Wouldn't the 'shake' from JJ just be a kind of RNG? Why not add 'shake' from any movement? After all, if the gyros can't handle a slow lift to 15m, how can they compensate running over rough terrain at 40+kph? Not to mention any JJ nerf will also be a nerf to mechs like the Spider.

We already have a mechanic that causes damage to internals if trying to run a mech when it is hot. I really don't want to see more and more punishments implemented for heat. More modest builds overheat too. Penalizing them out of fear of 6 PPC Stalkers just isn't fair.

[Werewolf486 ScorpS]

Ragor, on 24 April 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

MWLL did lots of stuff wrong. But then again they got a lot of stuff right as well.

Spoiler

What is MWLL?

MWLL had some quite nice gamemechanics.

What could MWO have 'learned' from MWLL?


The jumpsniping annoyance.

MWLL was really concerned about extensive use of jumpsniping. Like it once was performed in MW4 and really split the community those days.

The MWLL solution:
A shake effect (affecting camera AND crosshair, sperate from each other) while using jumpjets.
-> Jumpsniping wasn't impossible but took by far more practise and was easier to counter, because the jumping sniper had to jump higher to get more time with the smooth 'float down' phase to line up the shots.


The mech heat issue.
In MWLL players had the known bad habit of constantly running very hot and/or not caring about shutting down or simply overriding the shutdown with pure energy builds.

The MWLL solution:
part #1: Above 100% heat the armor of the mech took constant damage. Not much, but enough to not do it too often. Logic wise it made no sense at all, but it was a working and accepted mechanic.

part #2: When running above 90% heat for a too long time, the heatsinks took damage. -> Their heat effciency got decreased.
The hotter your mech was running the faster the heat effciency dropped - and the damage was permanent.
-> You entered the match with for example 16DHS. After running around at ~100% heat for some time you still had your 16DHS, but they now worked only with 75% of their original effciency. As if only 12 where mounted. Bad luck for the trigger happy laser junkie.

my personaly favored part #3: (aka 'what I always wanted in')
Heat above 120%? -> mechpilot passes out until heat is again below 80%.
(Would even be a nice pilot perk to recover earlier and/or to tolerate higher heat levels)


The LBX disease.
The MWLL LBX family had the same bad reputation of being a heavy piece of useless junk, only usable in closest encounters.

The MWLL solution:
part #1: The spread got decreased to sane levels. At ~200m the whole load of an LBX-20 (which still had the widest spread!) struck the upper torso of a heavy mech.
part #2: An damage increase for internals.
As soon as the armor was down to 25%, 25% of the LBX damage hit already the structure. No armor left, the LBX did 25% more damage.


The UAC fault.
In MWLL Ultra Autocannons got their own weapon heat bar.
For example an UAC10 could fire 5 shots in rapid succession. But then the 'heat bar' was full. The sixth shot would jam the weapon at once. Or the pilot could decide to fire with approximately the ROF of a regular AC10 and had no worries.
The cooldown speed was at ~80% of the increase in 'weapon heat'.
-> Random chances are always BS, player control ftw.
Sidenote:
Regular AC had less spread than the UAC.


Why invent the wheel a second time when you can learn from the experience of others?


EDIT #1:
What about the passive/active sensor system of MWLL?

EDIT #2:

Spoiler

How did the MWLL sensor system work?
The sensors could be switched from active to passive mode.
On active mode it is quite like the MWO radar system except that it wasn't line of sight dependent.
On passive mode the sensor range got decreased to 250m and became line of sight dependent.
While running passive, any enemy mech on passive as coulnd't be detected at all. Only 'active' enemies showed up.
Passive running mechs could be locked on as well by LRMs, but the lock on time got trippled.
BAP and BHP still increased the detection range by 25%(BAP) / 50%(BHP).
(Me personally always wanted BAP&BHP equipped mechs on passive not depended on line of sight for detection.)
While running passive LRM and SSRM couldn't lock on enemies. -> LRM boats had to use active sensors to be able to fire their missiles.


And what about the MWLL TAG & Narc system?
Both systems decreased the lock on time for LRM and SSRM by far.
And LRMs (not SSRM!) flying around without a lock automatically locked on the next friendly TAG or Narc beacon.
-> LRM could be blindfired past the enemy position, a scout then uses his TAG or Narc and the missiles then locked onto that signal and could be guided into the target.
-> It was possible to blindfire LRMs and then guiding them around obstacles using the TAG and finally lead them into the target.

Easier explanation:
LRMs behaved like a kitten trying to catch a laser dot on the floor.

Spoiler

(Sounds very overpowered on the first read, but it actually wasn't since it required lots of skill and teamwork to work effectively and LRM had a quite wide turning radius.)

I fully support these ideas. After all we helped test them didn't we?

[Inertiamon]

Ryokens leap, on 25 April 2013 - 12:41 PM, said:

I learned that glowing energy weapon barrels are lame.

But they do allow swift ID of the enemy kit which was useful.

[Ryokens leap]

Inertiamon, on 25 April 2013 - 03:28 PM, said:

But they do allow swift ID of the enemy kit which was useful.

We have a full list of target load out in MWO, which I still don't understand how our sensors get this info.

[General Taskeen]

Ragor, on 25 April 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

(This was for me the biggest design fail of MWLL. Besides the coolant flush and the default respawn matches. (I hate respawn gamemodes with all my guts.)

Personally I don't mind it. It allows for longer match game-play with a battle going back-and-forth, ebb-and-flow, counter-attacks, siege defenses, etc. It feels more like Battle Tech all-out-war, and I don't mean just because it is combined arms. It makes it feel more like an operation.

I am used to playing sim campaign matches that lasted hours. For, example I flew in WW2 flight sims, and flying for hours in a Bf-109 put real strain on me, but that's why I liked it, because it felt real that way. Obviously not for everyone, but I would at least like game modes added later that last more than a measily 15 minutes.

Edited by General Taskeen, 25 April 2013 - 07:24 PM.

[Corvus Antaka]

Inertiamon, on 25 April 2013 - 04:18 AM, said:

Also of course the MWLL guys weren't working in the Canadian games version of the Bermuda Triangle where maps inexplicably cost quarter of a million dollars each to make and mechs cost more to make virtually than a new ferrari costs in real life.

Epic.

[Xtrekker]

As long as we're missing MWLL experiences...

I grin every time I see my double-scope radar console and reticule in posted MWLL content, even if it was implemented incorrectly and never fixed. I'm certainly not pro, but I feel like I left my mark. Hard to believe that was 4 years ago.

[Theodor Kling]

Ragor, on 25 April 2013 - 07:24 AM, said:

The 'claimed costs' are unfortunately valid.
Creating a map takes hundreds of manhours.
For the mappers, the 2D artists (textures), the 3D artists (assets) and the QA.
Which must be payed. Plus their workspace and so on.
A volunteer project doesn't have these costs.
And the working hours do not count.

Well, the 2D artists didn´t realy do much for a while. most textures on alpine look alot like Firrest Colony Snow ( well..it´s snow), and the new Canyon map is alos no big jump in that department. Ifthey were putting out diverse maps with lot´s of unique buildings..but they don´t.

Davers, on 25 April 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

[...]
@OP
While the spread of the LBX should be tightened up, what you are describing would be far superior to the AC/10, and the chance for TACs would make it possibly better than any ballistic currently in game.

Wouldn't the 'shake' from JJ just be a kind of RNG? Why not add 'shake' from any movement? After all, if the gyros can't handle a slow lift to 15m, how can they compensate running over rough terrain at 40+kph? Not to mention any JJ nerf will also be a nerf to mechs like the Spider.

We already have a mechanic that causes damage to internals if trying to run a mech when it is hot. I really don't want to see more and more punishments implemented for heat. More modest builds overheat too. Penalizing them out of fear of 6 PPC Stalkers just isn't fair.

I disagree about the ACs: The wide spread of bundle munition is fine. What I miss is the possibility to switch between slug and shot.

Movemment accuracypenaltiessound good though.

And heat: No dmg until overheat, true.. but where are the TT movement and aim penalties for running on high heat constantly?

[Ragor]

General Taskeen, on 25 April 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

Personally I don't mind it. It allows for longer match game-play with a battle going back-and-forth, ebb-and-flow, counter-attacks, siege defenses, etc. It feels more like Battle Tech all-out-war, and I don't mean just because it is combined arms. It makes it feel more like an operation.

I am used to playing sim campaign matches that lasted hours. For, example I flew in WW2 flight sims, and flying for hours in a Bf-109 put real strain on me, but that's why I liked it, because it felt real that way. Obviously not for everyone, but I would at least like game modes added later that last more than a measily 15 minutes.

Only speak for myself here:
I partially agree with you.
What I don't like about respawn matches in general:
It does not matter at all (except for the scoreboard), if I destroy enemy assets or not. It does not really effect the gameflow.
It usually leads to:
Team A pushes Team B back to their baser, crushing Team B's forces. Team B at some point leaves their base as a group, crushes the damaged Team A, rolls back (crushing the dropping in reinforcements of Team A on the move) to Team As base until Team A gathers their forces in their base... rinse and repeat.

But what is fine for me and I actually really like:
Limited spawns with fixed assets.
-> That's why I am looking forward to the Dropship gameode.

What I would love to see:
Objective based gamemodes (with limited respawns) with various steps and changing goals!
Team A defends, Team B attacks.
Each game is played twice with changing sides.


But again, that is just my personal opinion and opinions may differ and that is totally fine.

Sidenote:
Long time ArmA(+Aces mode) and IL-2 fanboy here.
BF-109G ftw.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Theodor Kling, on 26 April 2013 - 01:33 AM, said:

(...)
And heat: No dmg until overheat, true.. but where are the TT movement and aim penalties for running on high heat constantly?

I totally agree with you on this one.
But the whole point of my OP was, to ask the question why MWO started more or less from scratch and did made some of the same 'mistakes' like MWLL it in the beginning. I wonder why PGI didn't pick up where others stopped.
-> Therefor I only listed stuff which was already in MWLL and working. As the 'MWLL solution' for issues MWO faces atm.

If this would be about what I would like to see as new concepts:

Movement inaccuracy due to high speed: (this was already a feature of MWLL)
-Every mech wich is running above 80% of its top speed a slight wobbling of the crosshair takes place. The higher the speed, the more difficult the aiming gets.
-Chicken leg mechs are more affected than humanoid ones since due their geometry their torso has a constant vertical movement. Too compensate this, chicken leg mechs have a better acceleration and decceleration and are in general more nimble.
-> More destinctive flavour and character for the individual chassis.

Heat penalties:
Mech effects:
- Mech heat above 80%, the myomer starts to harden. Therefor the torso turning speed and the arm movement speed gets slightly decreased.
- Running heat above 90% for a long period of time:
Weapon start to spread more and more.
- Sensor failures, radar failures.

Pilot effects for running very hot for long period of time:
- blurry effects start to take place in face movements.
- heavy breathing soundeffects.
- view gets washes out (view is becoming more and more greyish / check out flight sims for simulated G-effects) (+pilot perk to stretch it)
- tunnelvision (FOV gets decreased more and more with a classic tunnel effect (+pilot perk to stretch it)
- short 'blackouts' like the pilot twinkers more and more often and longer (+pilot perk to stretch it)
- finally the pilot is passing out (+pilot perk to stretch it)


-> In the CB forums I once made a long and fully fledged out thread regarding this topic. (IIRC this was one of two threads I ever started in the MWO forums which became 'popular'.)

Edited by Ragor, 26 April 2013 - 05:02 AM.

[Ragor]

Davers, on 25 April 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

PGI is hiring. If the MW:LL guys were interested they could apply.

Everybody I still have contact to from the MWLL team is still loyal to MWLL.
No one I know even considers to help PGI.
Which really saddens me, since their experience as devs AND players would IMO really help MWO a lot.

Davers, on 25 April 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

@OP
While the spread of the LBX should be tightened up, what you are describing would be far superior to the AC/10, and the chance for TACs would make it possibly better than any ballistic currently in game.
(...)

#1 LBX: LBX are supposed to be the superior version of the AC family. But even with a tightened spread there would be a major difference: pinpoint damage and higher rate of fire (AC) versus 'pure splash damage' (gamemechanic wise).
#2 TAG: Thousands over thousands hours of testing and gaming of MWLL by hundreds of players proofes you wrong on this one.
I agree, that in theory it sounds really OP. But in the actual game environment it is just a tweak, just another option how to use it. But nothing which is the standard technique since it is only useful in very special situation and very hard to perform if you really wanna make some crazy stunts.

!Cave!
The MWLL LRM had a different flight path and behaviour than the MWO LRM. Wider turns in general and more spread, and on the last 50m of flight they only went straight and couldn't turn at all.
-> Quite easy to dodge with jumpjets, impossible to hit a circling light mech. (ok, if he continued running straight he was scrapped... but then again... his own fault.)

Edited by Ragor, 26 April 2013 - 04:56 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

What i found most interesting in MWLL were their weapon balance.

First the damage system was less abstract..to normal standard (simple linear hp(armor reduction) I figured out that 2 points of MWO armor are roughly the same as 150-170 points of MWLL....
Every Autocanon need on average 3 secs to deal the damage they are supposed to do in MWO.
The question was just how many shots you need to do that.

The most clever decision was to throw the fixed TT values out of the window.
Modify armor, heat and damage values - that they are harder to compare... and go only for the feeling....and the MWLL feeling is the same as in TT
You really need the same time with MWLL weapons as you would need with TT weapons to bring down an enemy.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 26 April 2013 - 05:09 AM.

[StalaggtIKE]

General Taskeen, on 25 April 2013 - 06:46 AM, said:

• NARC allows missiles to auto-seek the beacon if dumb-fired (like it is supposed to from TT)
  
• Heat/over ride is better balanced, slowly damages mech if staying in over ride zone, damages heat sinks, then damages weapons, then destroys your mech if continuing to stay in the red zone
  
• Active/Passive Radar, C3 Master/Slave Units, Balanced ECM (missiles can lock onto ECM, just takes longer, Passive + ECM allows sneaking around, no radar can find you, but people can lock-target you if they see you)

All are things I wish MWO would "borrow" from MWLL. What MWLL lost to MWO in art direction, they more than made up in common sense weapon balance.

[Ragor]

Karl Streiger, on 26 April 2013 - 05:07 AM, said:

What i found most interesting in MWLL were their weapon balance.

First the damage system was less abstract..to normal standard (simple linear hp(armor reduction) I figured out that 2 points of MWO armor are roughly the same as 150-170 points of MWLL....
Every Autocanon need on average 3 secs to deal the damage they are supposed to do in MWO.
The question was just how many shots you need to do that.

The most clever decision was to throw the fixed TT values out of the window.
Modify armor, heat and damage values - that they are harder to compare... and go only for the feeling....and the MWLL feeling is the same as in TT
You really need the same time with MWLL weapons as you would need with TT weapons to bring down an enemy.

I agree with you, that the overall feeling in game was great.
But what they actually did:
They through the heat and damage per shot over board.
But they kept the overall dps and hps the same like in TT, only finetuned it in specific cases.

But what they IMO made wrong:
They changed the weapon weights in some cases to make more sense.
Ok, fine gameplay wise. But not good for a BT game, where suddenly some classic builds weren't possible no more.

The 2nd thing I disliked:
They only went after dps. But they didn't seperate 'damage over time weapons' from 'one hit weapons'.
Later on they fine tuned it very nice, but initially this led to many unbalances.

But once more, that is just me and I can only speak for myself.

-----------------------------------------------


Edit:

StalaggtIKE, on 26 April 2013 - 05:15 AM, said:

All are things I wish MWO would "borrow" from MWLL. What MWLL lost to MWO in art direction, they more than made up in common sense weapon balance.

Hey, don't spite on my beloved MWLL Bushwacker & Raven. The coolest reincarnations of any mechdesign in the Mechwarrior history.
Same to the Hawkmoth and the Sulla.

But in general I have to agree, especially the early models had been quite lousy.

Edited by Ragor, 26 April 2013 - 05:21 AM.