206 replies to this topic

[Karr285]

Those arent the SKILL fanatics they are the Terrible Players, If you have weapon spread you have to be BETTER at the game than just point and click, you may have to actually know how to use more than 1 type of weapon or use teamplay to win.

[Karr285]

Neverfar, on 29 April 2013 - 04:55 PM, said:

But they say time and time again how skilled they are to be using one weapon type only and converging it on one location at a time. Poptarting optional.

Delusion is a b*tch

[BR0WN_H0RN3T]

The more i think on a solution the more im starting to agree with players that think penalising boating is the answer. Boating is the problem. Why? Because it's effective and pros outweigh costs. Penalise boating with a heat penalty. i dont think reducing weapon dps is the answer

Edited by Brown Hornet, 29 April 2013 - 05:06 PM.

[Karr285]

take the BT heatscale and modify it to MWO imo

http://d20battletech.wikidot.com/heat

0= 0%
30 = 100%

Edited by Karr285, 29 April 2013 - 05:09 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Neverfar, on 29 April 2013 - 05:17 PM, said:

Our heat table needs the tabletop penalties to speed/accuracy, at the very least. I already expect loud shrill cries of how unfair that would be from the usual people.

It always comes fast and loud when IVE proposed that in the past

[MegaZordTrololo]

I much prefer longer drawn out fights, so I am in favour of an overall reduction of weapon DPS. This will also help low alpha high DPS weapons (AC2, AC5) compete with high alpha low dps weapons (Gauss, PPC).

And to the people wanting cone of fire on weapons. No, terrible idea. Weapon convergence already throws aim out enough. What might be ok is some sway in the mechs body as it moves, as it is something the player can actively compensate for. However combat is very static as it is, we don't want to give slow moving sniper builds any more advantage than they currently have.

Edited by MegaZordTrololo, 29 April 2013 - 05:28 PM.

[Davers]

Neverfar, on 29 April 2013 - 05:17 PM, said:

Our heat table needs the tabletop penalties to speed/accuracy, at the very least. I already expect loud shrill cries of how unfair that would be from the usual people.

The TT heat penalties will have little effect on the popular high damage builds. 6 SRM6 Catapults, Dual AC/20 builds, and even 6 PPC Stalkers will be effected little. All these builds kill in 2-3 Alpha strikes. 6 PPC Stalkers are used to overheating and sitting helpless, why would a speed penalty bother them? The builds hurt most by this would be mechs that use smaller weapons that have to fire and use movement to protect themselves- Jenners, Cicadas, Hunchbacks, Centurions, Dragons, Spiders.

[jeffsw6]

Davers, on 29 April 2013 - 03:37 PM, said:

I am a bit surprised that the Devs would think the over-all damage was too high. With all these high alpha/pin point damage builds you would think mechs were being cored with LESS damage, not more. Certainly less then when we had LRM boats routinely doing massive amounts of damage.

Agreed. I do less damage in my AC/40 Jagercheese than in any of my other mechs, yet get a similar amount of kills.

Barghest Whelp, on 29 April 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

Secondly, changing the tons/slots of weapons is out of the question. There are just way too many BT neckbeards here

Trying too hard to please those "BT neckbeards" will ensure this game's failure. I honestly don't care if an AC/20 does 20dmg or not. My Atlas has hands; where are the objects I can pick up to melee an opponent to death? They are pretend interweb robots in a first-person-shooter where it's possible to aim.

In short, you can have only one of these:

• battletech math and a ****** game
  
• battletech math with random cone-of-fire and a game where aiming doesn't matter
  
• math that works for an FPS, and a fun game

Anyone who thinks otherwise is just kidding themselves. Right now the game is bleeding players, and the noob experience is worse than ever. 8v8 being replaced with 12v12 is going to eliminate some clans' ability to field a competitive team. If they don't make significant changes soon, we will be lucky if there are enough players for a PUG next year, let alone a 12v12 at 2am.

Neverfar, on 29 April 2013 - 05:17 PM, said:

Our heat table needs the tabletop penalties to speed/accuracy, at the very least. I already expect loud shrill cries of how unfair that would be from the usual people.

Davers has largely beat me to it, but how are heat penalties going to affect a 4 - 6 PPC mech who fires all his weapons in one instant, and then ... uses cover while he cools? How will this fix the Gauss Rifle also wrecking mechs from ridiculous range?

Almost every post I see about weapon balance is dealing with one specific gripe that they have, or making an idiotic suggestion like yours and ignoring the fact that it will impact brawlers far more than snipers, only worsening the problem of entirely long-ranged games.

I've made a comprehensive set of suggestions that include every weapon, plus floated a buff to internal CT structure. I'm not seeing anyone else make a remotely useful suggestion that would actually fix the problem. "Delete double heat sinks" will not. Heat penalties won't. Changing rate-of-fire won't. My suggestions, in total, would probably come close to fixing the weapon balance.

Edited by jeffsw6, 29 April 2013 - 10:09 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Frisk, on 29 April 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:

Once Pandora comes out of the box, she doesn't go back in and now we have to worry about the Min/Max-Warrior Online and the Ebb and Flow of the "Flavor of the week".
:\

Pandora didn't come out of the box, she opened the box.
[/Nitpick]

[Barghest Whelp]

jeffsw6, on 29 April 2013 - 10:04 PM, said:

Trying too hard to please those "BT neckbeards" will ensure this game's failure. I honestly don't care if an AC/20 does 20dmg or not. My Atlas has hands; where are the objects I can pick up to melee an opponent to death? They are pretend interweb robots in a first-person-shooter where it's possible to aim.

In short, you can have only one of these:

• battletech math and a ****** game
  
• battletech math with random cone-of-fire and a game where aiming doesn't matter
  
• math that works for an FPS, and a fun game

Anyone who thinks otherwise is just kidding themselves. Right now the game is bleeding players, and the noob experience is worse than ever. 8v8 being replaced with 12v12 is going to eliminate some clans' ability to field a competitive team. If they don't make significant changes soon, we will be lucky if there are enough players for a PUG next year, let alone a 12v12 at 2am.

So what you're saying is that every mechwarrior game that has been made so far has been a **** game with battletech maths?

Gotcha.

[Jungle Rhino]

I don't know why PGI is surprised that damage has gone up and PPCs are being boated just after they introduced the Coolshot modules that effectively add 50% to the burst damage capability for such a build.

I wonder how many people are actually spending MC on this module that has single handedly sucked the fun out of this game?

Was it worth it PGI?

Someone else can quote the dev who said that coolant flush would break the heat mechanics thus never be in the game.

[Marcus Cvellus]

Hmmm, it is fishy logic. Only thing that massive lowering of overall weapon damage will do is to hinder viability of lower damage builds with fewer hardpoints.
It will just push boats even more and make heavy/assaults even stronger because of more armor they wil "get" so to say.

[MangoBogadog]

AC, on 27 April 2013 - 03:51 PM, said:

The thing that frustrates me is that if PGI thinks damage is too high, then they are not paying attention. I have said this numerous time, it is NOT the weapons. It is the mechs. Balance breaks when they release a new mech that can boat weapons. Remember back to closed beta? The only mech that got a lot of attention was the K2 Gausapult. Why? Because PGI has a terrible slot system that lets you put gauss where Machine guns should go. Streaks were broken because of the SplatCat, AC20 is broken because of the Jagger, PPC is broken because of the stalker. It is the mechs themselves that break balance, NOT the weapons. Fix the slot system on the mechs and weapons balance will be simplified and overall game balance will be much better off.

This is completely right in my opinion, it would make mechs far more interesting with a greater variety of weapons.

[mekabuser]

THE ONLY MECHS THAT DIE TOO QUICKLY ARE THE ONES PILOTED BY GUYS WHO DONT KNOW HOW TO AVOID FIRE>
PERIOD>
AND YES< CAPS ARE REQUIRED!!!


seriously.. couldnt say it any louder.
I am an overly aggressive pilot who used to die alot.. about 1000 matches worth..
Now , im an overly aggressive pilot who DOESNT die alot.
Im the same pilot in my head, but each and every time I die now its because ...
I
Made
a
Huge
mistake.


ive been running a 5 ermed jenner, not over 120kph and while it is really squishy, games are more than surviveable with a decent team.

evasion and cover is equally as important as being able to fire a shot.

[MrZakalwe]

Does anybody think dramatically slowing down weapon convergence would help?

[MustrumRidcully]

mekabuser, on 30 April 2013 - 02:28 AM, said:

THE ONLY MECHS THAT DIE TOO QUICKLY ARE THE ONES PILOTED BY GUYS WHO DONT KNOW HOW TO AVOID FIRE>
PERIOD>
AND YES< CAPS ARE REQUIRED!!!

Do you think it is possible to know exactly where to find enemy snipers at all times, and always maneuver in a way that they cannot possibly hit you?

The trick of a Sniper with a 60 damage alpha is that you don't get to react to the first shot. If you're missed by that first shot, it's not your achievement, it's simply the Sniper's aim that was off.

Maybe in a Jenner you're actually mobile enough that you can count deliberate erratic movement as a skill you possess to make aiming for a Sniper difficult even if you don't know he has you in your sights. But in all the mechs half as fast...

[Adridos]

MustrumRidcully, on 29 April 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

The people in Closed Beta thought a lot of these things through.

The problem is the devs didn't. Or if they did, they didn't agree with our conclusions.

Do I have to remind you the conclusion always was: "You just suck at the game, boating is fine, convergence is a random BS," and so on...

[MustrumRidcully]

Adridos, on 30 April 2013 - 03:58 AM, said:

Do I have to remind you the conclusion always was: "You just suck at the game, boating is fine, convergence is a random BS," and so on...

I think that's already much more than the Devs communicated.
That was more PGI fans. Vassago would call them people with Gold Vision.

"It's Beta." "Wait for Double Heat Sinks!" "Learn to manage your heat!"
Shall that be the words that lead to MW:Os downfall? [/OverlyDramatic]

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 30 April 2013 - 04:29 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

Sephlock, on 29 April 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

Travel times are too high.

Not picking on you Sephlock but damn. The Community moaned and groaned about Projectile speeds like forever and finally got its way. We can't go back now and gripe about that...

I have to go with HEAT. For those weapons, other than the Gauss Rifle (the exception to the exception) as the range and damage increase so does the Heat produced. There has to be some "new" Formula that can be concocted that would work for all the weapons in a consistent pattern.

Slowing the game down might work but then you kill it for those the Dev need to draw in. The pew pew crowd. The daka daka crowd will gripe but finally adapt but in the end the niche crowd can't float this boat themselves.

Even a Newb can be told and or taught that HEAT is bad and to pull the trigger a lot their Mech has to be inside a certain Heat "Envelope" And if this "Envelope" is not honored, the results are long and brutal shutdowns, often in the face of enemy fire, and even if survived the Mech itself takes damage such that if the enemy don;t get you, you will get you.

How that is best accomplished is best left to those who are in charge.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 30 April 2013 - 05:01 AM.

[Belorion]

MaddMaxx, on 30 April 2013 - 05:00 AM, said:

Not picking on you Sephlock but damn. The Community moaned and groaned about Projectile speeds like forever and finally got its way. We can't go back now and gripe about that...

Oh but they can and they will. They complained about maps being too small, PGI introduced larger maps, and now the complains are that some of the maps are too big.

They complained that streak a pults were op, and that srms did too much damage, now they complain that srms are underpowered.

They complained that heat on the PPC was too high, now they complain its too low.

They complained that lights were to hard to hit, now they complain that lights aren't viable.

They complained that pugs were getting pitted against 8 mans, now they complain about not being able to drop with bigger groups.

They complained that there was not 3rd person view, now they complain about 3rd person view being implemented.

They complained a lot... and they are going to complain a lot more.


What exactly do you think the community is going to do if they "nerf aiming". Do you really think that is going to go over well with a lot of people?

If I have 5 lasers which one is tied into my reticule? It doesn't even make sense to have a reticule if it doesn't mark where your weapons are pointing.

If they ever did introduce slower convergence then they would have to indicate where the weapons are pointing at all time, or provide some sort of locking mechanism to let people know when the weapons are converged. At that point the anti-aiming folks will still complain because the players can still tell where they are shooting.

Do you think there is any modern weapons system that doesn't let you know where your shot is going to fall?

Saying it takes less skill to aim when you have an accurate reticule is preposterous. Even if they did away with all of that the people that are the most accurate now will still be the most accurate later.

A couple of days ago I got dropped with no HUD (a bug I have rarely been afflicted with since open beta.) I was top damage on my team, and there were only two people on the enemy team who out damaged me. So know the "pro aiming" people don't cling to accuracy of the reticule because its the only way we can do well. Its because playing with one that isn't accurate is just not fun. If I didn't want to actually control my mech I would go play Tactics.



Someone asked me after my post about the earlier mech warrior titles if I had played the AOL version. It doesn't really matter. If you are looking toward a past title as the "ultimate" mechwarrior experience you are not basing that on the merits of BattleTech, but rather a former video game that you loved. Just because a former game was one that you liked doesn't make it the authoritative version. All of the titles have deviated from the TT game because they have had to. You simply cannot have a computer game based off the same exact set of rules than a miniature game. You obviously feel that a former game captured the feel of MechWarrior, while I do not. I think this game has come closer. Would I have designed this game differently? Yes, quite a bit differently. Does that make this game bad? Nope. It can still be a great game even if it is different than what I, you, or previous titles would have done.

That was the long answer, the short answer is: No, I avoided anything with AOL attached to it like it was the plague.