44 replies to this topic

[Homeless Bill]

Read the whole thing before you vote.

I don't want this to be a thread about whether or not forcing chain-fire would solve our current balance problems. That's a discussion for another thread. I want you to just forget gameplay balance as part of your reasoning.

What I do want is a discussion of why group fire is good or bad from a gameplay standpoint. Why should it exist in the first place?

In the context of the poll, assume that if you vote yes, chain-fire is fixed to have a slight delay so you can't macro or spam to get the same effect as group fire.

I have my own opinions, but I'll reserve those for now.

Edit:
Now that the votes are in, let me be perfectly clear:
BILL DOES NOT SUPPORT THE REMOVAL OF GROUP FIRE.

Bill supports this solution to balance most of the issues we have. This was nothing more than a research thread.

I wanted unbiased feedback as to why everyone likes group fire, and that's what I got. I know a lot of the things I like about group fire, but I figured there were more good reasons. I used you all for the brainstorming, and you all performed admirably.

Edited by Homeless Bill, 12 June 2013 - 08:35 PM.

[Zeus X]

Bill, I am usually with you on a lot of things, but this is ret*rded.

Edited by DCM Zeus, 11 June 2013 - 11:40 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Because Group Fire is required for a first person action-sim environment.

In Table Top it's not a big deal because you literally have all the time in the world to pick individual targets for your guns and think each thing over. In the real game, absolutely not.

Notably most people run at least 2-3 weapon groups anyway; it becomes a game of knowing when to use which group at which time, adding a ton of strategy that I think would be severely lacking if you were forced to chainfire all the time.

Furthermore, chainfire would obliterate small weapons over group fire. Why? Because small weapons tend to count on clusters of them hitting, or to be paired with something bigger. Why would you ever take time out to single-fire medium or small backup lasers? Removing groups would just encourage the use of the smallest number of biggest guns possible, because it would be the easiest way to deliver the most damage in the shortest amount of time - what people will ALWAYS do, and rightfully so.

So effectively, group fire is both a big part of strategy (including setting up your groups, with advanced users having more extra heat-management groups and optional chain fire groups) and absolutely required to keep "array" kinds of weapons viable.

[Valore]

Forcing people to run certain builds by nerfing everything else is a poor option. Stifling alternatives should never be the solution.

Instead, there should be incentives or benefits for running more balanced builds.

As it stands, there aren't really many reasons to take a balanced mech. Why run LRMs, lasers AND an AC, unless your hardpoints force you to ala the Atlas? Just boat all of the same weapon, and then pick your battleground and win.

Min/Maxing wins games. Variety doesn't. Improve variety. Don't keep trying to nerf min/maxing.

[Homeless Bill]

DCM Zeus, on 11 June 2013 - 11:40 PM, said:

Bill, I am usually with you on a lot of things, but this is ret*rded.

Or maybe I'm ******* genius, and I'm getting people like

Victor Morson, on 11 June 2013 - 11:42 PM, said:

and

Valore, on 11 June 2013 - 11:46 PM, said:

to do my brainstorming session for me. BEHOLD THE POWER OF THE INTERNET!

Edited by Homeless Bill, 11 June 2013 - 11:49 PM.

[Zeus X]

Homeless Bill, on 11 June 2013 - 11:47 PM, said:

Or maybe I'm ******* genius, and I'm getting people like
andto do my brainstorming session for me. BEHOLD THE POWER OF THE INTERNET!

Touche!

[Homeless Bill]

More reasons group fire should or should not exist? That's right; this is a ******* shameless bump to get more input.

[Jonneh]

Please stop underlining stuff, it makes me not want to read your posts. Emphasis is pointless when you over emphasize.

[FupDup]

This has much lower effects on the mechs that rely on a small number of heavy weapons, i.e. the 4 ERPPC Stalker or AC/40 Jager. Mechs that have to use numerous small weapons like Cicadas, Hunchies, and Jenners get r@ped up the buttocks by this. This game seriously poops in the mouth of small-weapons enough as it is and will only get worse once the new boating penalties get in...


Group fire has to exist so large quantities of small weapons can stand a change against small quantities of large weapons.

Edited by FupDup, 12 June 2013 - 10:24 AM.

[Tennex]

people can still just press all the buttons at once

[HRR Insanity]

No one wants to get rid of group fire. It's a canon part of BattleTech. The Alphastrike is a requirement for the game to be BattleTech.

That being said, as you know, group fired weapons and the Alphastrike shouldn't deliver all that damage in a pinpoint fashion.

EDIT: The reason that small weapons routinely require grouped fire is because they are intentionally UNDERPOWERED because they would be broken when fired in groups. That's why Devs have traditionally nerfed small weapons... because they couldn't figure out how to balance them with group fire in place (e.g. MW4, MWO). If there was a pinpoint accuracy fix, small weapons could be re-balanced to be similar to table-top... 3 damage 1 heat Small lasers anyone? 5 damage 3 heat Medium Lasers? See http://mwomercs.com/...53#entry2445653 for this discussion in detail.

Edited by HRR Insanity, 12 June 2013 - 10:28 AM.

[Odins Fist]

Homeless Bill, on 11 June 2013 - 11:37 PM, said:

"Would you be okay with group fire going away?"

I'm not sure what you expected from this poll, but your above intitial question "Would you be okay with group fire going away?", is the only thing i'm going to respond to..

I almost cannot believe this thread and poll even exist... Awful idea, completely awful.

[Joseph Mallan]

It is how I have played CBT for 26 years. Redesign My Mechs so it can fire most to all my weapons. It is foollish to try to stop folks like me from playing the game as I have for 26 years.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 12 June 2013 - 10:35 AM.

[Tennex]

HRR Insanity, on 12 June 2013 - 10:24 AM, said:

EDIT: The reason that small weapons routinely require grouped fire is because they are intentionally UNDERPOWERED because they would be broken when fired in groups. That's why Devs have traditionally nerfed small weapons... because they couldn't figure out how to balance them with group fire in place (e.g. MW4, MWO). If there was a pinpoint accuracy fix, small weapons could be re-balanced to be similar to table-top... 3 damage 1 heat Small lasers anyone? 5 damage 3 heat Medium Lasers? See http://mwomercs.com/...53#entry2445653 for this discussion in detail.

They actually buffed small weapons by giving them greater DPS relative to TT. (faster fire rate)

Which made sense to allow all mech chassis to be viable. And they can do that because of the hardpoint system, preventing large amounts of small weapons being boated

[Bilbo]

Odins Fist, on 12 June 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

I'm not sure what you expected from this poll, but your above intitial question "Would you be okay with group fire going away?", is the only thing i'm going to respond to..

I almost cannot believe this thread and poll even exist... Awful idea, completely awful.

What is even more astounding is that as I write this 3 people actually voted yes.

[Acid Phase]

[Lostdragon]

Removing group fire would make light strikers like every Jenner pointless. I would stop playing the game the moment that happened and probably would not ever pick it up again.

[HRR Insanity]

Tennex, on 12 June 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

They actually buffed small weapons by giving them greater DPS relative to TT. (faster fire rate)

Which made sense to allow all mech chassis to be viable. And they can do that because of the hardpoint system, preventing large amounts of small weapons being boated

In MWO, sure. But look at the heat ratios... They're waaay worse than they should be for the weight.

And in MW4, they nerfed both heat and damage.

[Sid The Kid]

FupDup, on 12 June 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

This game seriously poops in the mouth of small-weapons enough as it is and will only get worse once the new boating penalties get in...

I like where you are going with that.

[HighTest]

Sorry, I have to throw this idea into the "terrible ideas" bin.

If I wanted to mash number keys on my keyboard madly, I'd still be playing World of Warcraft.

Instead I'm playing a big stompy mech sim that takes place in the year 3050, at which point I would have imagined that by then someone would have mastered the concept of wiring two triggers to a single button on a control panel. Oh wait, I bet that can be done today... Besides, if techs can rip out entire weapon systems and replace them with something entirely different, odds are pretty good that they can wire stuff together in parallel or in series.

(Regardless, I presume you intend this to be a counter to weapons boating in-game? Yeah, I know, you didn't want to go here, but I feel I must. Well, it won't -- as long as boating layouts are simpler, easier and more effective, people will continue to min/max.)