Jump to content

Awesomes Still Need A Big Buff To Be Viable, What Is Your Idea To Make It Balanced?


  • You cannot reply to this topic
204 replies to this topic

#101 aniviron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,752 posts

Posted 01 June 2013 - 07:05 PM

View PostDeathlike, on 28 May 2013 - 10:44 PM, said:


Prepare to be disappointed. I always am after every "Ask the Devs" thread.


You were right, my question about the AWS (and DRG/HBK) hitboxes went unanswered. Though given the non-answers most questions received, I don't think I missed much.

If Snow's comment about weight loss are serious, then we are in for a treat. If not, it's a cruel gibe.

#102 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 01 June 2013 - 07:24 PM

View Postaniviron, on 01 June 2013 - 07:05 PM, said:

If Snow's comment about weight loss are serious, then we are in for a treat. If not, it's a cruel gibe.


Which comment exactly (link requested)?

#103 King Arthur IV

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • 2,549 posts

Posted 01 June 2013 - 07:25 PM

allow all of them to exceed 300 engine :D

#104 AntiCitizenJuan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,440 posts
  • LocationIn your base, killing your dudes

Posted 01 June 2013 - 07:43 PM

View PostKing Arthur IV, on 01 June 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:

allow all of them to exceed 300 engine :D


Bigger Engines on the Awesome does 1 of 2 things.

1) Allows bigger STD engines, which means less big guns, which means Awesomes are oversized mediums.
2) Forces pilots to run XL engines, which make the Awesome even more of a glass cannon.

It's just not the right answer.

#105 King Arthur IV

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Moderate Giver
  • 2,549 posts

Posted 01 June 2013 - 09:53 PM

View PostAntiCitizenJuan, on 01 June 2013 - 07:43 PM, said:


Bigger Engines on the Awesome does 1 of 2 things.

1) Allows bigger STD engines, which means less big guns, which means Awesomes are oversized mediums.
2) Forces pilots to run XL engines, which make the Awesome even more of a glass cannon.

It's just not the right answer.

i am totally fine with that.
its an idea not a solution. ideas lead to solutions. solutions are formed from many ideas. :D

in all honesty im fine where the awesome, its a great mech, its my favorite mech. the only thing i dont like about it is, it gets matched up against other assault mechs due to how match making works. i would really like to see match making balance teams using total team weight instead of by class. i think matching by weight will/may help some of the lighter mechs in their class come to light.

#106 Scrawny Cowboy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 574 posts
  • LocationVermont

Posted 01 June 2013 - 11:28 PM

Was said in AtD 39 that "less useful" variants will get some loving. I'll edit with quote/link.

View PostBryan Ekman, on 31 May 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

Ask the Devs #39

...

`Mech's and Mechbay

MavRCK: Some mechs seem easily to focus fire on specific areas such as the center torso more so than other mechs, ie. Awesome, Cataphract, Highlander. In the past, mechs such as the Catapult with this issue were adjusted (possibly had their hit boxes adjusted)? Would it be possible to look at the aforementioned mechs?
A: Each mech is designed to be have strengths and weaknesses. This can take the form of lager hit boxes or geometry, along with harpoints and quirks.

...

An Ax Murderer: What are your processes for determining which 'Mechs get quirks and which do not? Are they only given to certain chassis' or can we expect to see quirks for every variant later on down the road?
A: They all get quirks, we’re slowly going back in time adding them to each mech.

...

Zolaz: The "best" variant of the Awesome is the 9M and the Cataphract 1X does a better job with its slimmer profile. The Cataphract 3D sacrifices one laser slot for jump jets. The only thing the Awesome has going for it is a slightly more armor. However, that is offset by the exaggerated center torso that no one misses on the it.

A: We’re going to be tuning each chassis in the future to address some of the less useful variants.


Edit: Left in a couple questions that could be useful here.

Edited by B3RZ3RK3R, 01 June 2013 - 11:36 PM.


#107 Sigismund

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 67 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 02 June 2013 - 03:50 AM

I concur with most of the points made here about hitboxes ever since I bought the Awesome 8Q as my second mech when I started playing. The CT is Fat Mc Large Huge. Mounting an XL engine for at least 50 matches, I can count the number of times I've died by having my left or right torsos blasted before my centre on one hand. LRMs don't help though considering that their spread is tight enough to hit the CT for 90% accuracy from all sides, though that's a different discussion. Seriously though, try it in the training grounds.

This is not helped along by the fact that by being an "Assault" the Awesome has the same sluggish acceleration, deceleration and torso twist as a mech 20 tonnes heavier. We should also wait and see if the Orion has a torso twist speed as fast as a Catapult or Jagermech despite being 15 tonnes heavier.

The Awesome (8Q) doesn't lack for damage. I easily rack up 600-900 damage on an average-good match. That, however is only when not a single enemy mech so much as looks at me. Otherwise it's goodbye CT.

#108 Lightfoot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,615 posts
  • LocationOlympus Mons

Posted 02 June 2013 - 02:32 PM

I was testing my PB today (and it failed them), but it seemed obvious that HSR Ballistics is playing a large part in the downfall of the Awesome. I had my PB going about 74 kph with an ST engine and it got cored easily by any ballistic. Prior to HSR there was a lag shield that varied for each mech. I think that lagshield is balanced into the Awesome.

#109 aniviron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,752 posts

Posted 02 June 2013 - 05:40 PM

View PostB3RZ3RK3R, on 01 June 2013 - 11:28 PM, said:

Was said in AtD 39 that "less useful" variants will get some loving. I'll edit with quote/link.



Edit: Left in a couple questions that could be useful here.


That first answer sounds a lot like they think the AWS is balanced right now because it has "good points" and a massive ct. The rest of the answers are about chassis quirks, but +10% turning speed will not save the AWS.

#110 TB Freelancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 783 posts
  • LocationOttawa

Posted 02 June 2013 - 06:01 PM

In response to the title....I'd just put a good pilot in it.

#111 NoxMorbis

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 260 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 02 June 2013 - 09:04 PM

This is one of those cases where the OP crowd got their way. One of the Awesomes could run at like 82 and carry 6 medium pulse lasers with good heat efficiency. It was a fun build, but the only thing that made it playable was a huge engine for get-away zig-zag speed and close in manuevability. After they lowered the engine size, they got plastered, and still do today.

The OP crowd could not see this. Today, Awesomes are so not awesome.

Score one for the OP crowd. They turned a fun mech into a walking barndoor.

Edited by NoxMorbis, 02 June 2013 - 09:05 PM.


#112 Kaeb Odellas

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,934 posts
  • LocationKill the meat, save the metal

Posted 02 June 2013 - 09:43 PM

How do you guys make the PB viable? Its big engine capacity just doesn't make up for its absolutely godawful hardpoints. I can put out good numbers on my 9M and 8T, but I just can't get anything done with the Baby.

Edited by Kaeb Odellas, 02 June 2013 - 09:43 PM.


#113 aniviron

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,752 posts

Posted 03 June 2013 - 01:56 AM

View PostTB Freelancer, on 02 June 2013 - 06:01 PM, said:

In response to the title....I'd just put a good pilot in it.


Doesn't work when you can take the same good pilot out of the awesome, plop him in the stalker, and get much better results. That is not called balancing.

#114 Lightfoot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,615 posts
  • LocationOlympus Mons

Posted 03 June 2013 - 02:11 AM

Also. They have mentioned that Mechs will get individual "quirks". Shouldn't the Awesome's quirk be that it gets 10-20% better cooling from heatsinks?

This goes back to DHS 1.4 being a nerf aimed primarily (or having the hardest hit to) Energy based assault mechs. DHS 1.4 barely effects Lights, Mediums, most any Heavy, or Ballistic equipped Assault. Those Mechs all function similar to their Battletech origins. But an Energy based Assault can't run what are really mild Energy configurations in DHS 1.4. Such as 5 Large Lasers or 3 ERPPCs. Sure you can put those configs on some Awesomes, but even with 22 DHS the mech will shutdown too often to be combat survivable.

Not sure about the Stalker, it is tough enough to ride out alot of shutdowns, but no one survives with an Awesome that shutsdown. However some of the boating of 6xPPCs or 4xERPPCs has to be attributed to how easily Energy based mechs will overheat and shutdown. Meaning, if you are going to shutdown with a normal loadout, it makes sense to take say 6xPPCs so when you start-up you core anything in one shot. This is not how MechWarrior should be played though, Mechs are supposed to be very mobile and be able to manage heat with a little observation of the heat readout while in combat. No way should you have to wait 10-15 seconds between shots when Ballistic weapons are firing every 2-4 seconds with no pause ever. It's just completely borked.

So, the new Awesome quirk should be 10-20% better Heatsink efficiancy, whether double or single heatsinks.

Edited by Lightfoot, 03 June 2013 - 02:15 AM.


#115 MangoBogadog

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 377 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationUK

Posted 03 June 2013 - 03:11 AM

Back in CB Awesomes could be pretty menacing when they were could move fast. I know this takes away from its BT use as a sniper/support mech but allowing them to go quicker could make them more viable again.

#116 Lightfoot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,615 posts
  • LocationOlympus Mons

Posted 03 June 2013 - 03:31 AM

The Awesome CT hitbox is big as a barn door again. Bug or did this change, I am not sure.

If you shoot an Atlas it's very hard to find the CT. On an Atlas the CT is actually the front plate of the CT, if you hit the side or even the groove of the front plate, it hits the side torso. The Atlas CT extends down a narrow bar from there untill you reach a cross section at the waist, which is the CT also, then the bar extends down to the end.

On the Awesome the CT is the entire CT section, not just the front plate of the CT as on the Atlas, then the CT extends down that entire broad band to the bottom. This makes the Awesome a fat and easy to hit target from any range and any angle really since the CT on the Awesome also projects forward. You would have to twist about 100 degrees to your foe to cover it with a side torso.

So pretty obvious why the Awesome continues to be the fly-apart mech.

#117 MustrumRidcully

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 10,644 posts

Posted 03 June 2013 - 03:39 AM

View PostNoxMorbis, on 02 June 2013 - 09:04 PM, said:

This is one of those cases where the OP crowd got their way. One of the Awesomes could run at like 82 and carry 6 medium pulse lasers with good heat efficiency. It was a fun build, but the only thing that made it playable was a huge engine for get-away zig-zag speed and close in manuevability. After they lowered the engine size, they got plastered, and still do today.

The OP crowd could not see this. Today, Awesomes are so not awesome.

Score one for the OP crowd. They turned a fun mech into a walking barndoor.

IMO, that was still a horrible design. I didn't think it needed a nerf, but I also think that the best Awesome build should not be designed like an overweight medium.

#118 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 03 June 2013 - 11:08 AM

View PostMustrumRidcully, on 03 June 2013 - 03:39 AM, said:

IMO, that was still a horrible design. I didn't think it needed a nerf, but I also think that the best Awesome build should not be designed like an overweight medium.


Considering the Awesome ate two Cicadas, it needs exercise.

#119 Anjian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 3,735 posts

Posted 04 June 2013 - 10:22 AM

What hurt the Awesome most in my opinion, was the missile nerfs. Awesomes made notorious missile boats, and if they were packing SRMs, even a dangerous brawler. When missiles fell and PPCs rose, , the PPC using ones shifted to prominence.

I would think, that right now, the best way to use the Awesome is to be a support mech, mainly either as a PPC sniper or as an LRM boat. This does not mean those who wield Large Lasers with SRMs are not formidable brawlers.

I am in the opinion, the Awesome should be fixed by modifying its torso hitboxes.

#120 Vodrin Thales

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 869 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 04 June 2013 - 10:32 AM

View Postaniviron, on 03 June 2013 - 01:56 AM, said:


Doesn't work when you can take the same good pilot out of the awesome, plop him in the stalker, and get much better results. That is not called balancing.

Heck, take a good pilot and put him in a cataphract and the Awesome is toast. You can easily hit the CT when the Awesome puts his side towards you. Any large mech that cannot use torso twisting to hide it's CT is at a major disadvantage.

Edited by Vodrin Thales, 05 June 2013 - 06:34 AM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users