53 replies to this topic

[Kobold]

Assuming equal skill players on both sides, then yes, the assaults should win every time. Unit for unit they have more guns and more armor.

That being said, I strongly expect there will be sort of matchmaking balancing system.

[Major Bill Curtis]

Artillery strike.

/match

[colatruck]

I wouldn't mind this... or any sort of video thats a match from start to finish...

[Serevn]

Targun Darklighter, on 05 June 2012 - 07:40 AM, said:

How about this one Atlas vs 12 Stingers/Wasps. Let's see if its true. They say the Atlas will walk away and not one Stinger/Wasp will operational

The atlas would run out of ammunition for its main weapons and be reduced to its 4 med lasers before it could even kill half of those( taking into account all the misses)

[Dreden Aelnir]

Targun Darklighter, on 05 June 2012 - 07:40 AM, said:

How about this one Atlas vs 12 Stingers/Wasps. Let's see if its true. They say the Atlas will walk away and not one Stinger/Wasp will operational

12 medium lasers = 60 damage
24 machine guns = 48 damage
rear torso armor on an Atlas 7D = 10/14/10

Listening to an assault mech pilot bitc* about being gutted by a bunch of Stingers = priceless

Edited by Dreden Aelnir, 05 June 2012 - 07:59 AM.

[AussieGiant]

I'm hoping for an availability system to limit pure Assault lances.

They should be rare, cost a ton and be extremely expensive to repair.

That in itself should make an All Assault set up reserved for very specific instances. If the meta game is organised well then people should be able to opt out of facing a 12 Assault mechs company.

[Ian]

Quote

1) They don't focus fire.
2) They don't work as a team and leave their back exposed.
3) They don't protect their base and it gets capped. Really going to depend on the mission objectives. There are some objectives that players will want to achieve to receive xp according to the dev blogs.
4) The other mechs are better equipped.
5) They just a better shots.
6) They are all short range mechs while the opposing are long range.

The problem is these all require the 4 Assaults to be idiots. Lets try that with 4 good players playing the Assaults vs 4 good players on the other team.

The only chance the lighter team has is to capture their base.

Thats why this game needs some form of bv balancing.

[Roland]

Kobold, on 05 June 2012 - 07:42 AM, said:

Assuming equal skill players on both sides, then yes, the assaults should win every time. Unit for unit they have more guns and more armor.

This is incorrect.
Victory does not boil down to who has more guns and more armor.

You seem to be forgetting some critical elements here.. like mobility?

Ian, on 05 June 2012 - 08:35 AM, said:

The problem is these all require the 4 Assaults to be idiots. Lets try that with 4 good players playing the Assaults vs 4 good players on the other team.

The only chance the lighter team has is to capture their base.

Or the lighter team could just kill them.

Have you guys actually played previous mechwarrior titles? The assault mechs didn't just win the day.. Hell, in most cases, the assault mechs were inferior to the heavies. They carried slightly more armor, but generally suffered large hits to their mobility, making them sitting ducks.

Given the large advantage in mobility the lighter team would have, they would likely be able to dictate the exact terms upon which the battle took place... They could simply stay out of range of the Atlases, and chew them appart from range.

[colatruck]

Ian, on 05 June 2012 - 08:35 AM, said:

The problem is these all require the 4 Assaults to be idiots. Lets try that with 4 good players playing the Assaults vs 4 good players on the other team.

The only chance the lighter team has is to capture their base.

Thats why this game needs some form of bv balancing.

The ideal would be that the speed and scouting abilities of the lighter mechs give enough of an advantage that the balanced lance would win the majority of the time.

[Adrienne Vorton]

how many times we wanna discuss this? like already stated in this thread and in other threads over and over again: theory is one thing, the practise another...and since theoratically we have been through really EVERYthing... couldn´t we just wait for the practice? maybe the betatesters are right now trying the practical part? just maybe, could be they just paint and paint and paint their mechs...

ppl why dontcha just chill a bit?

*gets the strange feeling he knows where all that ppl from the SWtor forums went*...

[C L Daniel]

Totally agree w Adrienne V.
We have to wait until it can be tested few times, because there are a TON of unknown facks like the battlefield, tacticks, teamwork etcetcetec...
So we just wait till we have vids to chew on until we can beta

[Samuel Maxwell]

Adrienne Vorton, on 05 June 2012 - 08:44 AM, said:

*gets the strange feeling he knows where all that ppl from the SWtor forums went*...

You are awesome.

[Ian]

Quote

They could simply stay out of range of the Atlases, and chew them appart from range.

If you assume they are all Atlas then sure. Again I was talking about 4 good players in the Assault mechs.

Quote

Or the lighter team could just kill them.

Have you guys actually played previous mechwarrior titles? The assault mechs didn't just win the day.. Hell, in most cases, the assault mechs were inferior to the heavies. They carried slightly more armor, but generally suffered large hits to their mobility, making them sitting ducks.

Yes and I have played the TT game that this is purportedly going to be much closer to. 4 assaults beat 1 of each given equal skill and tuning (mechlab) on each side.

[Kobold]

Roland, on 05 June 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

This is incorrect.
Victory does not boil down to who has more guns and more armor.

You seem to be forgetting some critical elements here.. like mobility?

This is a weird conversation for me, because I actually prefer fast heavies for my play style.

However:

IS heavies don't move appreciably faster than assaults without XL engines. They certainly aren't fast enough to make them appreciably harder to hit with weapon fire. Look at how fast the Hunchback can move in the videos. No semi-skilled player should have problem landing all his weapons fire on a target that speed.

So again, assuming equal skill pilots (and assuming no nonsensical stacked matches, like a bunch of PPC weilding Cicadas against a bunch of slow moving assaults armed only with very short range weapons), my money is on the assaults every time.


Edit to add: This also assumes the pilots aren't building terrible mechs. Saying "we'll outrange the four Atlases" isn't helpful if the assault team is 3 Awesomes and one Atlas to clean up when you get close, or god forbid an Atlas that has dropped the AC20 to upgrade the lasers into LLs or PPCs.

Edited by Kobold, 05 June 2012 - 09:20 AM.

[Dark Severance]

Ian, on 05 June 2012 - 08:35 AM, said:

The problem is these all require the 4 Assaults to be idiots. Lets try that with 4 good players playing the Assaults vs 4 good players on the other team.

The only chance the lighter team has is to capture their base.

Thats why this game needs some form of bv balancing.

That isn't true at all actually. The battlefield itself is dynamic and thus always changing and critical hits change the game as well. It is easier for a faster mech to circle slower mechs and hit huge targets and focus fire, meanwhile the assaults would have a harder time focusing. Not to mention the Assaults have to be facing different directions, moving and hope they don't bump or shoot each other, to keep their backs covered. Otherwise 2-3 good shots from one faster mech and they are down. Meanwhile the faster mechs could all move as one keep attacking.

Be sure to look at the dev blogs about what is coming with the exp modules and packages. Those drastically change the game with the ability to call in fire support, artillery, increase damage or heat venting. You are rarely going to have a team where everyone is exactly matched out. Then it becomes less about the actual mech fight and at that point is more about objectives, capturing the base or destroying the objective, etc. Not all fights are just about who is left standing and which mechs win.

[X101]

Well not enough people in game atm so mm has trouble wit balance. More reason to invite some more people

[PANZERBUNNY]

Serevn, on 05 June 2012 - 07:30 AM, said:

Keep them on their toes don't directly engage, kite them, go for the base.


And a lack of air support... his supply lines were repeatedly decimated by air raids, but he did well despite that. And his army was actually officially defeated after he was recalled back to Germany and he had to leave the command to others..

Officially defeated by the combined resources and material of....The entire British Commonwealth, including Australia, India and the United States (Or as some like to call them, "The colonies.".) sweeping in from the West.

Despite being "offiially defeated", as per typical German resourcefulness, it took an overwhelming opponent to see them done with many, many victories across the scorching sands of North Africa.

Edited by PANZERBUNNY, 05 June 2012 - 12:32 PM.

[UncleKulikov]

Medea, on 05 June 2012 - 06:15 AM, said:

Post a Match between 4 Assault Mechs vs 1 Assault 1 Heavy I medium and 1 light.

I am curious to see why the 4 assaults wont win or do maps force you to have one of each.

It would be hard to match 4 assaults against an even team in terms of either tonnage or battle value.

PANZERBUNNY, on 05 June 2012 - 12:31 PM, said:

Despite being "offiially defeated", as per typical German resourcefulness, it took an overwhelming opponent to see them done with many, many victories across the scorching sands of North Africa.

I'm flying my Rommelcopter

Edited by UncleKulikov, 05 June 2012 - 12:34 PM.

[Roland]

Kobold, on 05 June 2012 - 09:19 AM, said:

This is a weird conversation for me, because I actually prefer fast heavies for my play style.

However:

IS heavies don't move appreciably faster than assaults without XL engines. They certainly aren't fast enough to make them appreciably harder to hit with weapon fire. Look at how fast the Hunchback can move in the videos. No semi-skilled player should have problem landing all his weapons fire on a target that speed.

So again, assuming equal skill pilots (and assuming no nonsensical stacked matches, like a bunch of PPC weilding Cicadas against a bunch of slow moving assaults armed only with very short range weapons), my money is on the assaults every time.

Edit to add: This also assumes the pilots aren't building terrible mechs. Saying "we'll outrange the four Atlases" isn't helpful if the assault team is 3 Awesomes and one Atlas to clean up when you get close, or god forbid an Atlas that has dropped the AC20 to upgrade the lasers into LLs or PPCs.

I could see chewing even that dedicated set of assaults apart using missiles, with locks being supported by the light and medium mechs.

Ultimately, it's all hypothetical until we get in the mechs and play, but based on past experience in other MW titles, Bigger =/= Better.

[EyeOne]

I really think the mixed lance would have this fight. It does depend on a few other factors like the main attack range of the assault mechs and whether or not they have ammo based weapons or not. I think if they had short range, ammo based weapons it would be even be a contest: Mixed lance wins.

But if we're dealing with long range energy weapons it because a different story. However at the end of the day if the mixed lance works together they when. Mobility is key.

This is coming from someone it typically pilots slow assault mechs.