68 replies to this topic

[John MatriX82]

One Medic Army, on 05 May 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

One of the other big downsides to the stalker is the gigantic torsos, in which said exploding gauss would be mounted.
Along with an XL engine if you want more than 2 PPCs to go with it.

Think about that for a second: XL engine, exploding gauss rifle, gigantic side torsos...

..fireworks

Fireworks also with a STD engine, you don't even have anything els than the RT to tank damage for a GR. AC 20 is the best bet and then hello heat management.

[Asmudius Heng]

Nothing wrong with boating.

There is something wrong however when boats do not have significant downsides because they focus on a single role. Boats should be high risk high return - however, most boats are not really that risky to run from the benefits they give back.

That is a game design problem - not a problem of boating.

[Echo6]

An omnimech some vehicles and some mechs that aren't boating anything. impressive.

[Steel Claws]

Tennex, on 05 May 2013 - 08:55 AM, said:

the map was probably designed before the poptart issue emerged though

besides map design shouldn't be too dependent on metagame. since metagme changes all the time

I'm so tired of all the bitching about how this or that is ruining the game because it is so OP. History will tell you how ineffective all this nerfing and bitching really is. If you nerf something they will find something else. Guass are too powerful - nerfed. Then it was LRMs are too powerful! - whammo nerf. Then it was streaks and then the QQs wanted SRMs nerfed too. Guess what - there will always be something that will get switched to because it works.

Whats really funny about all the PPC complaints is that just two or three months ago everyone was bitching that PPCs were under powered - and the damage level was not increased since then. I said then that PPCs were fine as they were but they got a heat reduction anyway. I love to see all that complaining rewarded so they can complain about something else. Nerfing has NEVER done anything that really helped game play and balance.

People still use all of the weapons - I see them all almost every drop. Brawlers have to use some smarts to make it work now but it is still possible on all maps - and yes I've done it so don't tell me it can't. You just can't do a total noob rush and get away with it. Snipers can and are being beat regularly by teams using brawlers to rush them because the high alpha builds can't manage their heat well enough to stop them. I see it all the time so complain to someone else.

So in conclusion - people will use what is working at the moment. You nerf it and they will switch to something else and basically there was no reason to do a nerf in the first place. You don't like being jump sniped - don't stand in the open. The game balance is closer than many suspect to being correct.

Edited by Steel Claws, 05 May 2013 - 04:25 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

Steel Claws, on 05 May 2013 - 04:21 PM, said:

I'm so tired of all the bitching about how this or that is ruining the game because it is so OP. History will tell you how ineffective all this nerfing and bitching really is. If you nerf something they will find something else. Guass are too powerful - nerfed. Then it was LRMs are too powerful! - whammo nerf. Then it was streaks and then the QQs wanted SRMs nerfed too. Guess what - there will always be something that will get switched to because it works.

Whats really funny about all the PPC complaints is that just two or three months ago everyone was bitching that PPCs were under powered - and the damage level was not increased since then. I said then that PPCs were fine as they were but they got a heat reduction anyway. I love to see all that complaining rewarded so they can complain about something else. Nerfing has NEVER done anything that really helped game play and balance.

People still use all of the weapons - I see them all almost every drop. Brawlers have to use some smarts to make it work now but it is still possible on all maps - and yes I've done it so don't tell me it can't. You just can't do a total noob rush and get away with it. Snipers can and are being beat regularly by teams using brawlers to rush them because the high alpha builds can't manage their heat well enough to stop them. I see it all the time so complain to someone else.

So in conclusion - people will use what is working at the moment. You nerf it and they will switch to something else and basically there was no reason to do a nerf in the first place. You don't like being jump sniped - don't stand in the open. The game balance is closer than many suspect to being correct.

The contstant state of nerfing comes from the extremely efficient boating of any weapon that is slightly decent because boating in this game comes with many pros and harly any cons.

This means there will always be boats of the most effective weapons. This also means PGI will continue to nerf things and buff things in a constant stream of neverending balacing which will never fix the problem because the weapons stats themselves are not the core issue.

The mechanics of heat and aiming and mech/hardpoint design to a degree are all contributing to a system that funnels competative players into these non-choices of what is the most effective build and play style.

Balance is NOT close to correct - it never will be until there is a reason that variety exists on the battlefield due to many effective weapons and reasons to NOT take a boat.

[blinkin]

Sephlock, on 05 May 2013 - 10:59 AM, said:

side note that scene came about because Harrison Ford was sick that day. originally it was supposed to be just a standard fight scene. but he was feeling like crap so they traded out the fight for that single gun shot.

[Steel Claws]

Asmudius Heng, on 05 May 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

The contstant state of nerfing comes from the extremely efficient boating of any weapon that is slightly decent because boating in this game comes with many pros and harly any cons.

This means there will always be boats of the most effective weapons. This also means PGI will continue to nerf things and buff things in a constant stream of neverending balacing which will never fix the problem because the weapons stats themselves are not the core issue.

The mechanics of heat and aiming and mech/hardpoint design to a degree are all contributing to a system that funnels competative players into these non-choices of what is the most effective build and play style.

Balance is NOT close to correct - it never will be until there is a reason that variety exists on the battlefield due to many effective weapons and reasons to NOT take a boat.

I would tend to agree with the veiw that the hardpoints are the problem but I rather doubt it will ever change at this point.. This is where the hardpoint system in MW4 was good. It limited how big a weapon could be fitted. I would love to see hard points limited in size for energy, missles and to a smaller extent on ballistics. The only real issue is that it would probably break the game at this point and you would see some mechs never used again - this was what happened in MW4. Mechs with crappy hard points just weren't used. You could also increase how many slots some of the weapons take. A six slot PPC wouldn't get boated as much but this would probably break the game as well.

[Asmudius Heng]

Steel Claws, on 05 May 2013 - 04:52 PM, said:

I would tend to agree with the veiw that the hardpoints are the problem but I rather doubt it will ever change at this point.. This is where the hardpoint system in MW4 was good. It limited how big a weapon could be fitted. I would love to see hard points limited in size for energy, missles and to a smaller extent on ballistics. The only real issue is that it would probably break the game at this point and you would see some mechs never used again - this was what happened in MW4. Mechs with crappy hard points just weren't used. You could also increase how many slots some of the weapons take. A six slot PPC wouldn't get boated as much but this would probably break the game as well.

MW4 had the problem of poor weapons balance as well. You could also use the slots system to boat the bejezuz out of smaller weapons - except that they sucked so no one did.

The current hardpoints with size restrictions would be a happy medium between the two but PGI have stated they will not do it.

That being said - as you stated boats will still exist because boats are canon as well. Nothing wrong with them except they are way too efficient compared to people trying to play more balanced builds.

However a more restricted lab would easily identify which mechs are natural boats and if they do nothing else to the game those can be given indiect nerfs such as reduces agility worse engines and the other limited ways they have to indrectly balance variants.

However this is all band aid fixed to fundeamental problems that they either cannot or will not fix.

The canary down the coal mine is the trial mechs. Stock designs which people basically ignore now. These are what was consideed decent mechs in the base IP. IF they cannot even compete ... then PGI have failed to implement MWO as anywhere near faithful to the lore, the mechanics, and the ideas of Battletech in all its forms TT, novels etc.

Back to the hardpoints thing - even with size resticted hardpoints balance is not achieved - hardpoints are about variety and roles before balance. Balance is many other things but is hampered by core design decisions.

Just my point of view of course.

[Hammerfinn]

Wow. Interesting and cordial discussion in a grief thread? Crazy.

To the OP:

The FOTM changes often; the nerf/buff cycle is eternal; the metagame shifts and balance is fluid.

This isn't them being bad to the players; this is problems with a small dev-team, a somewhat rabid player-base, and min/maxxers who push a certain meta-shift that more casual players don't like.

[xRaeder]

Yeah this game is going from stupid to ********. Oh look. I have a build that only works in certain cases. Let me jump into a random map selector game and hope for the best.

This folks is why you are seeing people boating weapons like the PPC and Gauss. Because they work in 90% of situations.

[Rat of the Legion Vega]

Not convinced boating is the root of the problem... if you force people to take multiple different kinds of weapons, there will still be OP COMBOS of weapons that are most efficient. For example, 2 PPCs, a Gauss, and an AC/10. Some weapons and combos will still fare poorly. So once again, it returns back to the question of weapon balance. Getting weapons in tune is the key to good game design. Ask the Call of Duty developers - they seem to be decent at balancing weapons given they're the most successful shooter of the decade.

As far as Misery goes, the Stalker chassis itself is OP, and not just because of its huge boating ability. Too small for an assault mech, difficult to core, high arm mounted weapons. Most games end up with Stalkers (or Highlanders) getting the top score lately.

.

Edited by Rat of the Legion Vega, 05 May 2013 - 05:30 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

xRaeder, on 05 May 2013 - 05:23 PM, said:

Yeah this game is going from stupid to ********. Oh look. I have a build that only works in certain cases. Let me jump into a random map selector game and hope for the best.

This folks is why you are seeing people boating weapons like the PPC and Gauss. Because they work in 90% of situations.

I dont know about that.

Random maps is actually an interesting lever to push people to create balanced builds. Some long and short range weapons to cater for different maps.

The issue here is that the bigger maps are on a higher rotation right now.

However it is also that those boats have little downsides even in smaller maps.

A core design decision from PGI should have been that balanced builds should be viable and encouraged, but boating is nearly always preferable it seems.

In fact, the dreaded LRM boat i felt was one of the best boats because it had a significant downside of minimum range. Backing up LRMS with medlas was always a good idea - however backing up PPCs and Gauss with any other weapons would reduce your efficiency of killing showing a serious problem.

You are right however - why take other weapons when the top ones contain so few drawbacks?

Given maps you can choose hwoever simply means people will grab thier best boat for the range needed so nothing will change that much.

[Steel Claws]

Asmudius Heng, on 05 May 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:

I dont know about that.

Random maps is actually an interesting lever to push people to create balanced builds. Some long and short range weapons to cater for different maps.

The problem is that you don't know what map is coming and can't pick a mech based on that - this is supposed to change at some point as I understand.

What he was saying is that if someone takes a long ranged weapon they are generally speaking still able to use that weapon at close range but the opposite does not hold true so the current thinking is to take long ranged weapons. Just the opposite of what your thinking. Why take weapons you may not be able to use. If you knew you weren't getting Alpine then people would be far more likely to take a brawler build because these builds will eat a snipers lunch almost every time when they get within effective range.

Edited by Steel Claws, 05 May 2013 - 06:04 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

Steel Claws, on 05 May 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

The problem is that you don't know what map is coming and can't pick a mech based on that - this is supposed to change at some point as I understand.

What he was saying is that if someone takes a long ranged weapon they are generally speaking still able to use that weapon at close range but the opposite does not hold true so the current thinking is to take long ranged weapons. If you knew you weren't getting Alpine then people would be far more likely to take a brawler build because these builds will eat a snipers lunch almost every time when they get within effective range.

Yes, but if you know you are on river city night most people will all take close range brawlers.

This people will boat up or down depending on the range of the map. It will kill variety just as badly IMO because this is pretty much what happened in MW4 - some maps you just all took snipers, some you just took brawlers.

I like random maps except that i feel that close range builds and mixed range builds suffer way more than long range builds. Long range builds do not have enough drawbacks but this is more a PPC thing due to the ease of boating and forgiving heat than it is say gauss rifles which are good but not as easy to pack on ... though quite frankly they are often a better investment than AC20s due to thier flexibility in a brawl and long range.

I think then lobby system they said will have the choice of 3 maps or something. I imagine you will be able to take 4 mechs in using that 4x4 square of ready mechs so you are somewhat limited - but most people will probably just bring a long range boat, a short range boat, a fast scout and ... a different long range boat?

Not sure if it is going to help variety at all imo

[Mr 144]

One Medic Army, on 05 May 2013 - 10:00 AM, said:

Yes, with a 250xl and 14 DHS plus substandard armor...

That's a great idea [/sarcasm]

People keep saying this, like they kept saying the quad UAC/5 jäger would be so awesome.
Funny, I never see quad UAC/5 jägers.

/agreed......however...

my personal best Atlas atm with nerfed missile hardpoint meta...
4xLL+AC/20
Misery does it better.....

Misery is not competing against sniper builds....misery is competing with the few non-sniper competetive assault builds...smoke and mirrors my friends...smoke and mirrors....

This of course means that any missile 'tweak' is put off for a minimum of 4 weeks to boost sales of misery. Once a missile 'tweak' occurs a month from it's release, it won't be a big deal at all....minipulate the meta ftw PGI...kudos to you guys for another smoke and mirrors profitability scheme...the sheep don't see it...congrats

Mr 144

[Roadbuster]

xRaeder, on 05 May 2013 - 05:23 PM, said:

Yeah this game is going from stupid to ********. Oh look. I have a build that only works in certain cases. Let me jump into a random map selector game and hope for the best.

This folks is why you are seeing people boating weapons like the PPC and Gauss. Because they work in 90% of situations.

And you think this will get better when players can select the mech after they know which map they are going to get? Please lend me your pink sunglasses sometime.

As for boating high damage long range energy weapons (aka PPC, no mech can carry more than 2 Gauss and still be viable), that comment is true.
It's because they work too good and it's easier to boat them than to create a loadout with a mix of different weapons.

The problem isn't boating though. It's that you can fire all these weapons in alpha strikes without overheating.
So in my opinion the heat threshold and the way heat sinks work requires a change.
Heat threshold is too high because every heat sink increases this threshold by 1,0 for SHS and 1,4 for DHS. That's something they were never meant to do. They are heat "sinks" not heat "buffers".

[Dirus Nigh]

Echo6, on 05 May 2013 - 04:19 PM, said:

An omnimech some vehicles and some mechs that aren't boating anything. impressive.

You just showed your ignorence of battletech.

The nova is armed with 12 Er medium lasers It is the poster child for boats.

The longbow has four LRMs

The two missile tanks are just to versions of the same 60 ton tank. The LRM carrier has three LRM20s the SRM carrier has ten SRM6s

The Battlemaster has six medium lasers and a PPC. That a big time energy boat.

The JES has four LRM15s and two MML 9s

The monitor well its a boat.

This is just a random selection of canon units that boat a single weapon or type of weapon. There are several more examples I could show you. Could you please explain how these mechs brake Battletech?

Neverfar, on 05 May 2013 - 10:00 PM, said:

Adorable attempt to shoot down dissent. However, keep in mind, if you're attempting to use Battletech lore to push your pro-boat agenda, it can backfire. None of those vehicles up there were intended to be a full complement of a lance (or star), and were at best over-specialized machines that needed other Mechs or vehicles to pad their bad ranges or lack of versatility. See the problem here?

It's well and good to have 'boats' if it's viable or even preferable that they're not the only game in town. How many MMOs have an "alpha" class that doesn't need the assistance or support of anything other than more of its class? Oh, right, a few tried that and went down in flames, powergaming fanboys mourning the losses and all.

Wow your snide and tired.

I in no way have an agenda. I was responding to a poster that said a boat is braking battletech lore. I gave him examples on how wrong he is. You on the other hand want to jump to the conclusion that I am some how promoting boating as an agenda.

I am also well aware of what the mechs and vehicles are and how they are used. In actuality the missile boats would be used in a support lance. The LRM tanks would either be in units of four LRM tanks of the same type, or mixed with similar vehicles. After all a lance does not perform on their own. They would be used to support the rest of the company, or regiment. While another lance would be charged with protecting the support lance's flanks. You see Battletech is really a combined arms game.

In fact it is quite common that a lance would be made up of the same type of tank or mech. After all a military has to deal with logistics, and having the same tank to fill out a whole unit that performs the same job is simple. It also insures that the commander of a force knows exactly what type of equipment their individual units are using.

I dont care if people boat weapons on their mechs. I care about balanced risk/reward and consequence. A big reason PPC/LL boating is a problem is because the heat on those weapons were lowered. A PPC does 8 instead of 10, an ER PPC 11 instead of 15 (PGI had it at 13 and this was fine). Medium lasers had their heat raised because of boating fears. 4 instead of 3. Raising the heat of PPCs and LL back to the original levels and it will force players to use heat management skills to use four of them.

Another reason why energy boats are so prevalent and easy to use is because their is no consequence for high heat levels let alone spiking your heat way beyond the auto shut down limit. Give negative effects based on heat levels above 50% of the heat scale. Then have damaging effects after the heat level of a mech goes above the auto shut down limit. This thresh hold should be set at a value slightly above the shut down limit, so only massive heat spikes cause damage.

Another reason why high alpha snipers are used is how damage works beyond effective range. The PPC and gauss rifles still do viable damage well beyond their effective range. PGI should increase the rate at which damage is reduced based on how far beyond effective range the target is.

A fourth reason is that LRMs got nurfed big time. PGI will fix LRMs, but intil they do high alpha snipers will be prevalent.

Yes there are now other MMOs that have assets with the capacity for a high damage alpha. Other than mechwarrior, and any other game representing battletech in a multiplayer capacity. I want to play mechwarrior, not those other MMWOs. Those other MMOs dont have heat as a universal factor for their assets. Battletech does. Does not mean we should get rid of it. All those other mech using MMOs are just copying mechwarrior any way.

[Riptor]

This again.. look guys. Boats work so good in this setting because we are basically playing solaris death match. Boats in Battletech canon on the other hand are a MINORITY, they exist but if you compare the numbers. mechs that boat one specific weapons are a dwindling minority

Lets take a look at what would happen if we used combined arms thought:

Jumpsnipers? Taken out by battle armor cause they can only take out one or two troopers at a time due to reload times and the buggers are very small and comparatively fast. A swarm of even basic IS standard battlearmor could take down a highlander.

Medium laser boats? Ripped apart by anything that has a longer range preferably arrow IV or thumpers or VTOLs with LRMs and ofcourse sniper builds like the hollander. (real arty and not whatever we have currently)

LRM boats? Taken out by fast (faster then what the cryengine allows.. those things do exists in BT) scout mechs/vehicles and anything from the air (Because LRM in canon are NOT homing missles, for crying out loud the only "homing" lrm variant are semi-guided.... SEMI)

The thing is simply that MWO is a very uncanon depiction of battletech to begin with.

Who really needs a balanced loadout if you know that all youre facing is other mechs and not for example a unit made of tanks, VTOLs, mechs and battle armor/infantry?

So ofcourse you specialice in anti mech combat.. and anti mech combat is heavy frontloaded alpha strikes. Because that works best, even in tabletop (unless the dice screw you over).

I would like to see a 6 PPC Stalker go against a swarm of pegasus hovercraft, or even a conventional aircraft or bomber.

Fact is that the only enemies in this game are mechs and that the maps are "fair", something that would very rarely be the case in actual warfare. The defender most often decides where to fight the invader, and i highly doubt the defender is willing to play fair.

As was said before about boats in Canon, they are specialists and need the support of other non specialised crafts on the battlefield to fullfill their role. A Blackhawk for example will have a hard time against anything with greater range.

A Longbow on the other hand is pretty much dead weight against hit and run attacks from fast vehicles or against battlearmor.

Also the real reason boat builds in mwo break "canon" is pinpoint accuracy. Mouse aiming is more precisy then you could ever hope to be in a humanoid battlemachine thats really stompy, heck the weapons arent even effected at all by walking/running/jumping and your aim is allways accurate.

All these elements together make boats so effective and will be the reason why they will stay effective through the entirety of MWOs existance.

Its not that boats break canon, its mwo that breaks canon

Imagine a planetside 2, only that its actually battletech scale and you have the choice of meks/tanks/b-armor... oh wait... that was MW:LL minus the permanent world.

Edited by Riptor, 06 May 2013 - 02:21 AM.

[Yokaiko]

Runs With Scissors, on 05 May 2013 - 08:56 AM, said:

one of the biggest downsides to the stalker is that it overheats easy if u only alpha. a gauss can ease that alot

If you have a gauss with any appreciable number of PPCs you are going to be running with an XL, and XL+guass+stalker side torsos are a laughable threat.

[Adrian Steel]

Gentlemen, please.

There will be no balance.

The meta-game will be changed. You will be conned into buying meta-specific MC related gear to be competitive in the new meta. You will be milked. Then the meta will change again. You will be milked again with new meta-specific gear for MC.

This pattern is not new to MWO.

This pattern is not new to online games.

You're welcome.

Edited by Adrian Steel, 08 May 2013 - 07:40 PM.