213 replies to this topic

[Inflatable Fish]

I get the impression people have misunderstood me, at least in part.

I'm not suggesting that mediums should be able to go toe to toe with Atlases. What I *am* saying is that with any role you could think of for a medium mech, there's another light, heavy or assault mech that does it better. Capping? A light will get there first. Defense? A light will outmanoeuver me at any time. Damage? I've been outscored by bloody Jenners solely because they're faster and harder to hit, and they mount 6 MLs with considerably better effective time on target than I can ever boast. I'm not even mentioning heavies and assaults in terms of damage output cause they should be above, but does it have to be so far above that it marginalises my whole weight class?

In tabletop BT, mediums were the "scrapper" class - weaving their way between brawling heavies and delivering pain from all the least convenient angles. If grouped together and coordinated, they were always a force to be reckoned with by their own virtue. With the current environment, this role has been made obsolete because a) a precious few people want to actually brawl; b ) mediums are denied by the bloated heavies who obliterate them the moment they try and live up to their supposed role.

So what if I go and cap? The moment the opposing team realise what's going on, I'll have a highlander and a jager coming after me, unfettered, because my buddies in the English trenches (loved that metaphor ) won't have the momentum to take advantage of this distraction. Either I'll run away and make all the time I spent to flank the fray and go cap go to waste, or I'll get caught and welded into the floor. Effectively, I'll do close to zero damage, accomplish nothing to help the battle, and/or give the opposing side credits for the kill. Is that what a medium mech is supposed to be? A collaborator?

Keep the discussion going, ladies and gents. Even if it's pointless in the end cause PGI walks in mysterious ways, it's as good a place as any to let the frustrations out.

Squidy, on 11 May 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

Add me and I'll be your Atlas Brawling buddy

As much as it warms my heart, I'm Europe-based I'm afraid.

Edited by Inflatable Fish, 12 May 2013 - 05:21 AM.

[shadN]

1. I LOVE THIS GAME!

2. IMHO, mediums are NOT brawlers, because they can´t sport good armour. That is the reason why you can´t survive 2 alphas from anything bigger btw.

3. Mediums DO have a major advantage: They have relatively light reactors and structure. An Atlas needs 55 tons of reactor to go 60kph, a hunchback needs only 11.5 tons.That means, deducting structure and armour, they will have an almost equal payload! And mediums have a LOT of wepaon hardpoints (compared to their weight.).

4. Ergo: Mediums are perfect support mechs bcause of their great payload. Anything more close up should be performed by heavies and assaults.

PLUS: PGI need to fix that damned game balance, that causes everybody to go sniper build.

Edited by shadN, 12 May 2013 - 06:00 AM.

[Elizander]

Medium mechs are a little too slow and a little under armored with today's alpha strike builds. 4-6 PPCs anywhere will strip away all your armor. Getting hit in the arm might even cause your weapon there to be destroyed. A lot more tweaking is necessary to get them into a state where they are preferable over other weight classes or at least competitive with such. A few solutions off the top of my head:

• Even more twisting, turning, acceleration, deceleration speed for improved maneuverability. It's treading on the toes of light mechs though. I still feel that mediums currently do not have enough maneuverability and responsiveness to be good platforms.
  
• Increased vertical torso turning range and increased arm-movement range/speed. They aren't as big as the other mechs so they probably won't fall over if they can bend down or lean back a bit more than usual.
  
• Increased hard points. They are already restricted by weight. Giving them more hard points than usual will just increase their diversity (Example - 1E/2B/1M in the RA of a Centurion instead of just a 2B and maybe 2M/1E on the LT instead of just 2M). I realize there are graphical restrictions to this, but it can be fixed later. Now mediums can be the most flexible weight class in terms of weapons.
  
• (Band-aid fix) Since medium mechs are economical but we have no working economy (R&R) then make all medium mechs give 5% more c-bills by default (which stacks with hero and stuff) to represent how common they are and how easy they are to maintain/repair.

[Ph30nix]

my Treb's are in my top 3 chasi stats wise and probably my top in Fun.

ive leveling other stuff at moment, but i still take breaks to run my 7M, 5j and 3c. heck im planning to drop 6mil on the 3C just to try a build for it at light mech speeds.

maybe i have noob ELO or im in some ELO Shangri La because all my matches tend to run a wide variety of mechs, builds and playstyles.

or maybe i dont notice because im too busy trying to counter any of the current QQ builds.

[Skunk Wolf]

A lot of what OP said could be fixed by making fire that is outside of optimum range inaccurate.

Bore-sight each weapon to the optimum long range. Tweak the energy weapon attenuation.

PPC's could spread out like an LBX-10 beyond max.

Imagine if Gauss and AC20 projectiles followed a ballistic arc outside of recommended range. As in, dropped like a rock. You'd have to fire the PPC's, adjust aim, then fire with the gauss.

There sure would be a lot of Jagers pointing at the sky.

[Gaan Cathal]

shadN, on 12 May 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

3. Mediums DO have a major advantage: They have relatively light reactors and structure. An Atlas needs 55 tons of reactor to go 60kph, a hunchback needs only 11.5 tons.That means, deducting structure and armour, they will have an almost equal payload! And mediums have a LOT of weapon hardpoints (compared to their weight.).

You have both hit on, and completely missed, the point here.

A: An Atlas can afford to go 60km/h by virtue of armour, a Hunchback can't.

B: The advantage is supposed to be that they have a lot of hardpoints in the case of the Hunchback (although not really any other mediums) but that's not really an advantage at the moment, because the fundamental basis of the hardpoint system has been broken. A PPC is now better than 7 tons of Medium Lasers. That's the fundamental balance problem at the moment.

[Cato Phoenix]

A big problem is that there is not much tangible benefit to taking a medium over a heavy over an assault at the moment. You may be moderately more manueverable and carry a bunch of weapons, but you could always do more with an assault. Medium and heavies existed because they're more resource efficient and versatile than assaults, but with the current meta its likely in your best interest to stock up on as much armor and long range guns as you can.

Another problem is that distance and sniping is the great equalizer, and the current trend is to sniping. A medium with long range weapons will have less of them and less armor to put around them. And at that distance, turning speed, twist, acceleration and deceleration, the leg-up on assaults that mediums have, is neutered. Manueverability is much more a benefit in close range situations and in a brawl.

I think you could easily fix the long range madness by bumping SRM damage back up, which will lead to an increased tendency to brawl, allowing mediums to get in where they can excel. Of course, you'll push up SRMcats, but whatever, really. Splatcats at least have a short range.

Repair and re-arm, and tonnage matching could also improve the medium's usefulness,

[Inflatable Fish]

The problem isn't the prevalence of snipers on the battlefield. Well, it *is* part of the problem because it forces a certain playstyle and introduces staleness.

But the core of the medium mechs' problem is that they're struggling at close range, which is where they should be shining by design.

[Noesis]

I don't see Mediums as completely useless but they currently have restrictions or compositions which based on current options means people will lean more to other options or ignore certain variants as they are comparably less worthwhile than other Mech choices. This more to do with the overall constraints placed on the medium class, but I do recognise that certain variants do shine at times in certain roles.

Mediums are too large overall (or heavies and assaults are too small), makes them an easier target for the larger Mechs on a relative scale who have comparable speeds and better weapon load outs. More relevant to the taller Cent and Treb here but the Mediums do seem proportionally large for their class when compared on the class scale with the more larger Mechs. This is more relevant when you consider the amount of longer range weapons that can be applied to Larger Mechs who wont suffer for a similar issue of not being debilitated so much at aiming at Mediums based on their profile. Though speed will make a difference here for translational aiming of course.

However, mediums had their engines restricted in closed beta which limits/removed some tactical choices and reduces a number of fast insurgent or guerrilla warfare roles that mediums are supposed to have as per TT and previous Mechwarrior simulations. This even when I recognise that the faster engines compromise fire power or other capabilities.

Even with the new addition of Blackjack there still not be a 55 ton top of the scale Medium Mech. Which again limits tactical choices.

ATM, I personally reluctantly play mediums since for all intents and purposes the dragon can offer similar movement performance if without JJ's but with much better firepower and armour. As such for me if I want to play Medium with the setup as is, I will select a Dragon. Similarly, I would choose a Raven over the Cicada due to Mech hit box sizes.

With the improvements applied in game with the recent initiatives with state rewind it could be sensible to reconsider easing some of the engine restrictions and "tweaking" the hit boxes a little to make Mediums anything but a Mechwarrior pinata to anything bigger atm in the main. Though I will agree that some Mediums can perform well in certain situations but overall in the current Meta I have noticed they need some love imho and in principal wouldn't have to be significant changes to see a marginal improvement and make pilots consider them having more of a purpose IG. Moreso however it would potentially open up the missing guerrilla warfare play style more as an option to Mediums that is noticeable missing currently.

The addition I expect CW will as stated hopefully bring the more economically relevant aspects of Mech management and deployment into effect for the meta game to further make mediums relatively more attractive. But I still think the above functional improvements could be applied as a more generic way to better balance the medium class as a more encapsulating method that can be applied to various game styles. Remembering of course that I think the modifications need only be subtle and not wild adaptations to improve player confidence with them.

[Tahribator]

As a player that has been loathing current "Assaultwarrior" meta that's been going on for a few months, here are some observations(facts) from my ~3500 or so rounds;

• Heavies/Assaults can be as mobile as mediums, while sporting better weapons and armor.
  
• Heavies/Assaults benefit from metagame changes the most, as they can boat the FOTM weapons without sacrificing much.
  
• Heavies/Assaults can be really effective with said high alpha boating, negating the skill required to "do good".
  
• There are no economic downsides to picking a Heavy/Assault over a Medium. The only negative are higher up-front payment and more expensive upgrades. Which don't matter considering the benefits.
  
• For your average F2P player, there is no reason to choose a medium over them. (Except if some of them come to forums and read the usual "Pick a 4SP, it's a great way to learn the game!". Which they promptly do and switch to a Stalker afterwards in disgust)

Thus, we have an assault/heavy overpopulation. I can count at least 4 Assaults 2 Heavies and rest "irrelevant" classes given any match. In this situation mediums become just a cannon fodder, worthless scraps waiting to die as soon as they are targeted.

I feel the same as OP, mediums have to be the backbones of the lance composition; covering Heavies/Assaults, helping the lights out occasionally, flanking/outmanuevering the enemy with a considerable firepower. Assaults should feel very important and their loss should be a big blow for a team. Since as I've said no weapon balance will bring players back to mediums, I think there has to be an artificial limit to improve the gameplay.

There are two suggestions that come to my mind;

• Artificially limit the mec composition per map. Lock the mech classes per match to something like 1 Assaults/2Heavies/3 Mediums/1 Light. Vary the numbers slightly per match to add a bit of randomness(eg. 2 Assaults/1 Heavy/2 Mediums/ 2 Lights). This will punish the overpopulated class with longer matchmaker waiting times.
  
• Bring back R&R in a lighter form. Operating bigger mechs cause less income. Lights/Mediums become the C-Bill grinder class.

Edited by Tahribator, 12 May 2013 - 06:52 AM.

[Inflatable Fish]

I agree wholeheartedly with your post Tahribator, save for one thing.

Tahribator, on 12 May 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

• Bring back R&R in a lighter form. Operating bigger mechs cause less income. Lights/Mediums become the C-Bill grinder class.

I don't want to be a c-bill grinder, I want to be a relevant part of the battlefield.

Edited by Inflatable Fish, 12 May 2013 - 07:00 AM.

[EGG]

Part of it still comes back to the game modes we have, which are mech slug 'n bash with capture points. Sometimes we'll start a conquest game and I'll groan when I realise we (ie pugs) have no lights or mediums.

The capture mechanic we currently have is secondary in Cbills / importance to killing, and so people treat it as such.

There needs to be a game mode where the objectives are everything, and kills/damage don't count (no this isn't heresy, this is how non-TDM usually works).

Would love to see some form of Capture the Flag, though I have no idea how you'd make it work with mechs. Also the problem of fatties sitting on the flag. Maybe if you put it on top of a tower where you could only get at it with JJ's.

[Tahribator]

Inflatable Fish, on 12 May 2013 - 06:59 AM, said:

I don't want to be a c-bill grinder, I want to be a relevant part of the battlefield.

With the game currently designed how it is, I don't see how.

Weapons/Equipment? There are no weapons meds can use that the heavies/assaults can't. Any buff to weapons will buff heavier classes unproportionally.

One way could be what Noesis suggested, scaling down the mediums so they become much more tanky, just like a Stalker. They will last much longer. This will require a lot of work on PGI's part and I don't see it happening.

Another way could be directly nerfing Heavies/Assaults. Say engines; so they can't go over 60 even with the spead tweak. Same for heavies, let's say 70. So the mobility of a medium becomes a big problem for these mechs. Though, I don't see the community accepting this.

It's a difficult thing but I think artificial limits are the way to go.

[Keifomofutu]

Tahribator, on 12 May 2013 - 07:09 AM, said:

With the game currently designed how it is, I don't see how.

Weapons/Equipment? There are no weapons meds can use that the heavies/assaults can't. Any buff to weapons will buff heavier classes unproportionally.

One way could be what Noesis suggested, scaling down the mediums so they become much more tanky, just like a Stalker. They will last much longer. This will require a lot of work on PGI's part and I don't see it happening.

There is one way of buffing mediums weapon wise without buffing heavies and assaults. Give the meds more overall hardpoints. This lets mediums pack more lower weight weapons(boating if you want)than heavies and assaults can which would remain hardpoint limited but tonnage strong. Basically give ALL mediums the hunchback effect of having plentiful hardpoints.

Another option would be to give mediums more arm hardpoints than other classes. This provides them more flexible firing arcs.

Just as an example why isn't there a single medium chassis that can have 4 missile slots? Is that reserved for heavies only?

Edited by Keifomofutu, 12 May 2013 - 07:40 AM.

[Corvus Antaka]

we really need tonnage limits, we shouldnt see more than 2 assaults in 8v8 and 3 in 12v12

[Inflatable Fish]

Noesis, on 12 May 2013 - 06:27 AM, said:

I don't see Mediums as completely useless but they currently have restrictions or compositions which based on current options means people will lean more to other options or ignore certain variants as they are comparably less worthwhile than other Mech choices. This more to do with the overall constraints placed on the medium class, but I do recognise that certain variants do shine at times in certain roles.

Mediums are too large overall (or heavies and assaults are too small) [snip!]

By pure maths alone, a 50-ton Hunchback should only be about a third taller/wider than a 20-ton Commando. And given how beefy the chassis looks, I'd say it should be at most a quarter taller than a Commando. Right now, it's about 1,5 times its size.

[jeffsw6]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 12 May 2013 - 07:41 AM, said:

we really need tonnage limits, we shouldnt see more than 2 assaults in 8v8 and 3 in 12v12

In truth I don't disagree with this idea, but in order to make that work, PGI needs to do a major overhaul of the match-maker.

The only way to make players able to find a game this way is to allow players to "ready" multiple mechs and let the match-maker choose which one they will play in a particular drop. For example, if you put 4 assault mechs on "ready" status (or just 1 and no other mechs ready) you would .. only be willing to play assault, and you may have to sit at "searching" for a long time. But if you ready 1 assault, 1 heavy, 1 medium, 1 light, then you are basically assured of finding a match fast. However, you must be willing to play whichever mech it picks for you.

This is the only way to make tonnage limits work right now.

[MustrumRidcully]

jeffsw6, on 12 May 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:

In truth I don't disagree with this idea, but in order to make that work, PGI needs to do a major overhaul of the match-maker.

The only way to make players able to find a game this way is to allow players to "ready" multiple mechs and let the match-maker choose which one they will play in a particular drop. For example, if you put 4 assault mechs on "ready" status (or just 1 and no other mechs ready) you would .. only be willing to play assault, and you may have to sit at "searching" for a long time. But if you ready 1 assault, 1 heavy, 1 medium, 1 light, then you are basically assured of finding a match fast. However, you must be willing to play whichever mech it picks for you.

This is the only way to make tonnage limits work right now.

True. If there are only 16 assaults waiting for a match, the match-maker can not do anything to add mediums.

But even then, it remains questionable. Do you really want a Hunchback instead of 2 Commando? Would you prefer a Black Jack to a Raven (10 ton difference, but the Raven is faster and has ECM)?

I suppose what they'd need is a team template, say
8 Man Team: 2 Light, 2 Medium, 2 Heavy, 2 Assault
12 Man Team: 3 Light, 4 Medium, 3 Heavy, 2 Assault

But ultimately, this would force people to use mechs they might not even like (or own). (Which is also a problem with the Economy system. This is a game I play in my personal free time for my enjoyment, I'll play the mech I like, and if I can't make that mech to work financially, the game isn't fun and I'll be gone.)

[Keifomofutu]

MustrumRidcully, on 12 May 2013 - 09:10 AM, said:

True. If there are only 16 assaults waiting for a match, the match-maker can not do anything to add mediums.

But even then, it remains questionable. Do you really want a Hunchback instead of 2 Commando? Would you prefer a Black Jack to a Raven (10 ton difference, but the Raven is faster and has ECM)?

I suppose what they'd need is a team template, say
8 Man Team: 2 Light, 2 Medium, 2 Heavy, 2 Assault
12 Man Team: 3 Light, 4 Medium, 3 Heavy, 2 Assault

But ultimately, this would force people to use mechs they might not even like (or own). (Which is also a problem with the Economy system. This is a game I play in my personal free time for my enjoyment, I'll play the mech I like, and if I can't make that mech to work financially, the game isn't fun and I'll be gone.)

Agreed incentives are much better than restrictions. Restrictions say "play the game this way or get lost". You don't want to make people choose option 2. Incentives say "play the game this way and get more stuff".

I agree that meds shouldn't be a C-bill grinder class but right now the reverse is true. You'll make a lot more money with heavies or assaults because they do more overall damage in general. So in that sense I wouldn't mind a money boost for lighter classes just to bring them up to par c-bill wise with heavies and assaults.

[jakucha]

Livewyr, on 11 May 2013 - 07:45 PM, said:

you know why the medium class fails right now?

player blob mentality, heavies and assaults blob around with long range weapons and ridicule any player that thinks differently... like leaving the group.


wanna bring back mediums? start capping bases... go for the throat. they'll start thinking lighter, out they'll get bored hugging the base.

Aside from fixing PPCs and/or heat system in general, if they buff airstrike and artillery it would help against the blobs.