267 replies to this topic

[cyberFluke]

AC, on 19 May 2013 - 05:06 PM, said:

This is another bandaid to fix a problem. Why can't PGI look for root cause to issues. The root cause of PPC boats is the slot system. Any system that lets me swap a small laser for a PPC is a poor system that will lead to imbalance. It was obvious in other MechWarrior titles, so I was completely blown away that PGI stayed with this system.

FIX THE ROOT CAUSE.... and please stop the bandaids. Bandaids create their own issues. (note: ECM to fix streak boats)

You're wrong. Sorry, but it's true. Boats (of any kind) are NOT a problem. The fact that all their damage hits one section of the mech is the problem.

Spread it out over an area of variable size dependant on a number of factors. There you go, problem solved, 'mechs don't die in two/three salvoes from flying (or otherwise) atrocities.

[Asmudius Heng]

moneyBURNER, on 19 May 2013 - 05:07 PM, said:

It takes skill when it's properly balanced for its intended role at longer ranges, as would any properly balanced weapon. If not as much skill in dealing damage and managing heat, then more generally such as positioning and maximizing the support role.

I find they are so good because they function as excellent brawlers as well which kind of seems silly. multiple gauss is still very strong its just that multiple PPCs are overshadowing it right now.

[trollocaustic]

PPC lends itself more to cover, as with all energy weapons, since they wouldn't stand a chance without it due to the heat probelms they have.

[jeffsw6]

Mazzyplz, on 19 May 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

no awesome is not unplayable right now, it's pretty good.

i haven't been to keen on commenting on this but i think this new "system" should affect boated weapons 4x and up.

We disagree about Awesome, but I suppose that's a topic for a different thread.

The thing is, PPCs are still pretty strong even if you play 2 PPC 2 LL (like I do) and yet, mechs with 4+ MLs, MPLs, etc. really do not need a nerf (IMO.) Besides that, it's easy for several mechs to carry 2 PPC + Gauss Rifle, or 2 PPC + 2 ERPPC, and still have jump-jet capabilities as well.


Putting my tin-foil hat on for just one paragraph: Maybe this is a secret plan to buff the MISERY and convince more players to purchase it. (Cue P2W crying.) After all, if jump-jets introduce cockpit shake; and the STK-M can boat 2 PPC, 2 ERPPC, 1 Gauss Rifle, ammo, and several extra heat sinks. Sound like a stretch? Maybe, but it is the only mech capable of equipping those armaments except for the AS7-RS, which is somewhat limited in pop-tart capability by its low arm-mounts. (Cease P2W crying since I'm sure this isn't really their intent; but it is a load-out only 2 mechs can carry; one being a Hero.)

Kiiyor, on 19 May 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

Not directed towards him...... well, except for the part where his name is mentioned in the title of the thread, of course.

I think that poster meant that Paul replied to my comment on Zap's energy-system post, believing that was directed at him/PGI. Of course this entire thread is intended to generate discussion about their planned anti-boating mechanic.

You might ask yourself why Paul decided to respond to an at-thread and stoke the flames; and the answer is probably that they are soft-selling the idea to see what kind of response it generates. Obviously my response is negative and critical in quite specific ways; but Mazzyplz, for example, seems to like it.

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

It may be fine in Table Top to create an odd mech with 6 different weapons, but that's not practical in a real-time shooter game.

I considered this also, and made a separate thread for my concerns about increased need for more weapon groups being harder for casual players (at least, those who prefer to use the mouse for firing weapons): http://mwomercs.com/...e-weapon-types/

[Fate 6]

Noesis, on 19 May 2013 - 10:57 AM, said:

@OP

How do you know that the applicability of multiplier effects to heat build up won't only apply to certain weapon types, especially when you were given hints by Paul this might be the intentional process?

Are you really that convinced of your own arguments and thoughts when the concept of boating is known as a valid technique and also that some Mechs are identifiably configured for such that the PGI Dev team wont allow some sensible boating to remain in the game?

How do you know for instance that they might only apply these effects (yet to be revealed as to how they will work) and scale them appropriately to curb more problematic high alpha use like PPC and ERPPCs whilst other weapons remain relatively unaffected by the change (as per hinted commentary from Paul)?

Why aren't you potentially twigging from Paul's original comment and subsequent attempts to try and confirm to you without giving specifics that they are considering the design in some detail?

Interesting that Paul asks the community not to fly off the handle with extreme assumptions about this change and you then consider it is ok to ring an alarm bell without any concrete evidence as to the working mechanics of the change and expect everyone to just accept your "theory".

But interesting that even when Paul then seems to offer some reassurances to your post, you have the ignorance to simply dismiss it.

The idea behind assumptions is that you question them, you don't hold them to be truth. More so you don't simply ignore those that might actually know what the reality is.

We are simply questioning their balancing idea

[Corvus Antaka]

1. every weapon has a different flight time. Gauss, ppc, ac, lasers, lrms.

2. boating only 1 weapon makes it significantly easier to maximize firepower and allows the pilot to adjust and focus only for 1 trajectory. (easy mode)

3. a ppc gauss config cannot hit the CT with both weapons when alpha striking unless the target is standing still or running straight at them/back. a 4 ppc boat can hit the CT with 1 alpha regardless.

4. even a rookie can tell it is a LOT easier to manage a mech with only 1 type of weapon system than 3-4. it is bluntly obvious given the current state of gameplay.

5. balanced loadouts means less big alpha dps to 1 node. it means more pilot skill will be needed to run mechs, and it means less DPS will core center torso instantly with little to no drawbacks to doing so.

As a long time FPS gamer, I find the dual ac/20 4 ppc combos ridiculously easy to run. Hitting mechs is stupidly easy, 5 year olds can do it. This is not Tribes or Quake. Core-warrior will ruin this game, and FPS gamers demand being able to shoot where they aim - and I don't blame them - but the nature of current gameplay balance makes mechwarrior so easy that once you add focus fire the only logical decision is to take highlanders, stand behind indestructible buildings for cover, and play peek-a-boo with the most long range biggest baddest pinpoint alphas.

In any other game we would call these "snipers" except in any other game, the snipers have limitations - go take a sniper in almost ANY other game and come back here and tell me how your sniper can also 1v1 a soldier or tank in close. it doesnt happen. All PGI is doing is making each mech favour infantry type loadouts-

an assault rifle - a grenade - a pistol - a sniper rifle. Would you take 4 assault rifles instead of one of each of those guns and then just fire all 4 at once?

oh right..you couldnt hold 4 machine guns and do that. but your mech can. small laser - pistol. ppc - sniper rifle - Laser - AR.

etc etc.

think a little harder before you whine.

[Roland]

Quote

In any other game we would call these "snipers" except in any other game, the snipers have limitations - go take a sniper in almost ANY other game and come back here and tell me how your sniper can also 1v1 a soldier or tank in close.

Actually, in a lot of games the sniper class can 1v1 a solider up close... generally where the term no-scoping comes from. Killing folks with a sniper rifle without using the scope.

[trollocaustic]

The main reason this works is because some games have the inane idea that a sniper rifle should be a one-shot kill regardless of where it hits.

*Cough* all of them *Cough*
In this game, snipers have the lowest dps, in exchange for range.

[Ralgas]

trollocaustic, on 19 May 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

The main reason this works is because some games have the inane idea that a sniper rifle should be a one-shot kill regardless of where it hits.

*Cough* all of them *Cough*
In this game, snipers have the lowest dps, in exchange for range.

Except thats only going to be true once the 4.0sec delay on ppcs goes through..............

[Vassago Rain]

trollocaustic, on 19 May 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

The main reason this works is because some games have the inane idea that a sniper rifle should be a one-shot kill regardless of where it hits.

*Cough* all of them *Cough*
In this game, snipers have the lowest dps, in exchange for range.

DPS is worthless. You can cripple a mech in two blasts, from way out of its range.

[Sybreed]

Vassago Rain, on 19 May 2013 - 07:48 PM, said:

DPS is worthless. You can cripple a mech in two blasts, from way out of its range.

this one gets it.

Worst case scenario? Enemy mech gets close, your "sniper" guns don't have any disadvantage like sniper rifles in other games (as in, no inaccuracy at close range)

[nitra]

the multiplication of heat from the firing of several like weapons systems is an idea fielded way back in the beta feedback forums.

it was controversial then, but now are getting a test of it .

i look forward to the test , i wish this kind of testing happened back in close beta but at least they are trying things .

with this test i hope they delve a bit deeper and try a more complicated system where heat stacking penalties occur only within those sections where you have stacked a set of weapons . i.e. rt 4 med lasers hell yeah its getting a penalty ..

rt 2 med lasers lt 2 med lasers nah no penalty .

i see nothing wrong with boating and i see nothing wrong with full customization , as along as the devs put in place rules that provides consequences for over specialization.

this is where i think the game falls short. there is not enough consequences for over specialized mechs . and there is no benefits for building a well balanced mech .


your weapons systems are tools that are designed to solve certain problems on the battle field .

identifying the problems on the battle field and implementing these weapons as answers to those problem would go a long away in to balancing the role of each weapon system .

also ensuring each weapon system has its draw backs and those drawback are felt in game. because as it stands now, all these mechs feel far to capable they should be a lot more dependent on their pilots abilities to adequately pilot and succeed with them on the battle field.


Also another sticking point is their should be a stock only mode in this game . implementing this with some player vanities such as titles, badges, and other things this would go a long way to making a better game.


its nice to see them wanting to try new systems better late than never hopefully they will learn something from this and maybe in the end we will get a better game out of it .

[Roland]

trollocaustic, on 19 May 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

The main reason this works is because some games have the inane idea that a sniper rifle should be a one-shot kill regardless of where it hits.

If you get hit by a high powered sniper rifle, you are gonna die, pretty much no matter what. And it's gonna be a pretty horrific death.

When a high powered sniper round hits your torso, it doesn't make a hole. It tears your body into two pieces, due to the immense cavitation force caused by a round moving at that speed.

trollocaustic, on 19 May 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

In this game, snipers have the lowest dps, in exchange for range.

It's always funny when people mention DPS in Mechwarrior, as though it means anything at all.

[Tor6]

Roland, on 19 May 2013 - 09:19 PM, said:

If you get hit by a high powered sniper rifle, you are gonna die, pretty much no matter what. And it's gonna be a pretty horrific death.

When a high powered sniper round hits your torso, it doesn't make a hole. It tears your body into two pieces, due to the immense cavitation force caused by a round moving at that speed.

This is patently false from a physics perspective. If you need an example of how this is not true look at a piece of paper after you shoot it (You -do- have some real world firearms experience and aren't just talking out of your rear CT right?). Paper is waaaaay less structurally sound than a human torso, and yet there is a single little hole in the paper. Now a round might fragment in the body and cause massive trauma and blood loss, but this is nothing like 'cavitation 'sploding dudes'.

[MustrumRidcully]

IceSerpent, on 19 May 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

Actually, there wasn't - it was a huge mistake on their part. If by "good reason" you are referring to mechs getting destroyed too quickly, there are much better ways to achieve that goal without screwing up everything else in the process. I.e. they could properly scale RoF to make weapons fire more often, then halve damage per shot and double ammo per ton values (this is just off top of my head).

Doubling armor, halving damage, that achieves the same thing, ultimately. I prefer the ROF-affects-damage-per-shot method, because it would also be the ROF-affects-heat-per-shot method and our mech's heat dissipation might possibly make stock mechs somewhat sensible, if unfocused, builds, rather than overheating monster, with custom mechs exploting a vastly inflated heat capacity to launch overpowered alpha strikes...

But as long as convergence exists and you can reliably and often alpha strike, boats have a precision advantage that they didn't have in the table top game, and is impossible to balance. You either need to remove convergence, or you need to make group fire and alpha strikes more difficult. The devs want to make it with this artificial method of inflating the heat generated by alpha strikes only, but they could lower the heat capacity all together and raise heat dissipation, and they'd reduce alpha damage / precision and make many stock configurations more viable.

[MasterBLB]

Well guys,the fact is ppcs on their own are fine.They are meant to be quick,long range instadamaging weapon at the price of high heat generation.And they exactly are.
But what is really wrong is the fact there are practically no consequences for overheating in MWO.THAT is what is really bad.
Jeffsw6 already had seen my post,for the rest of you who hadn't here I described core of the problem and how to fix it.

[Crimson Fenris]

How to solve the general problem, IMHO :

- reduce (ER)PPC's projectile velocity to what it was before the HSR, wich basically solved the previous lag issues
- slightly increase (ER)PPC's recycle time
- add penalties to high-heat weapons only (7 and more heat per shot for example) firing at the same time, proportionnaly yo the base generated heat (so the penalties will be the heaviest on a ERPPC and the lightest on a LL)

and the most important :
- make ANY overheat do automatic and proportionnal damages to internals, then shutdown. A PPC boater alpha-firing them close to 100% heat will reach about 150%, so that has to cripple internals about 50% of their HPs... and second salvoe in the same conditions will destroy the mech.

Simple, elegant solution to poptarters that are currently not affected by overheating, then securely land behind their cliff.

Did you notice the only way to take internal damages due to overheating is to override shutdown ? There is the flawed mechanism here. When the overheating will become a real problem (instead of a simple shutdown wich can be survived), the high-heat builds will be more balanced.

That will not necessarily fix the high-alpha builds, but the multiple PPC ones will greatly suffer if they didnt vastly reduce their rate of fire.

Edited by Crimson Fenris, 20 May 2013 - 01:44 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

MustrumRidcully, on 20 May 2013 - 01:02 AM, said:

Doubling armor, halving damage, that achieves the same thing, ultimately. I prefer the ROF-affects-damage-per-shot method, because it would also be the ROF-affects-heat-per-shot method and our mech's heat dissipation might possibly make stock mechs somewhat sensible, if unfocused, builds, rather than overheating monster, with custom mechs exploting a vastly inflated heat capacity to launch overpowered alpha strikes...

But as long as convergence exists and you can reliably and often alpha strike, boats have a precision advantage that they didn't have in the table top game, and is impossible to balance. You either need to remove convergence, or you need to make group fire and alpha strikes more difficult. The devs want to make it with this artificial method of inflating the heat generated by alpha strikes only, but they could lower the heat capacity all together and raise heat dissipation, and they'd reduce alpha damage / precision and make many stock configurations more viable.

This isn't CBT. It's not related at all to CBT, and when they go for release in september, it'll have even less in common with CBT.

People need to accept that MWO works differently to tabletop.

[EGG]

I'd really like to think that there's a more ingenious solution out there to boating than just slapping more heat on for boaters.

So far I've been fairly impressed with how PGI have resolved issues that plagued previous MW titles. But additional heat penalties for boats seems like a bit of a duct-tape solution.

[jakucha]

EGG, on 20 May 2013 - 04:32 AM, said:

I'd really like to think that there's a more ingenious solution out there to boating than just slapping more heat on for boaters.

So far I've been fairly impressed with how PGI have resolved issues that plagued previous MW titles. But additional heat penalties for boats seems like a bit of a duct-tape solution.

Whatever they do, I doubt it'll be a solution that will please everyone.