459 replies to this topic

[Lootee]

How about instead of cone of fire or spreading shots out over time we just play the spazkiddies' game and demand pinpoint armor convergence too.

All armor locations get combined into 1 location called Body. Since Body is about 6 times more likely to be hit, armor pts per ton is increased by a factor of 6. Since 6 PPCs all hit at once, increase armor by multiplying it by 6 again.

So an Atlas with 18 tons of armor + 10 tons of internals has a Body of 10368 armor and 5184 internals. So the death star drivers need to do ~15,000 damage to kill an Atlas with their perfectly pin point converging weapons.

That's with the normal 16 pts per ton of armor. With doubled armor it's 20736 pts Body.

It's fair, consistent with the absurd game mechanics, and doesn't take away anyone's precious perfect aim, make it so.

Edited by PanchoTortilla, 14 June 2013 - 10:34 AM.

[3rdworld]

DaZur, on 14 June 2013 - 10:12 AM, said:

Alright 3rdWorld... You seem to be the most ardent opposition to any sort of targeting deviation. You've been quite vocal, taken terse objection to virtually everyone's suggestion and questioned our logic and intent.

Fine... You know the problems we are facing with the current meta... The floors open, what's your suggestion since you've thus far not offered any and have only attempted to ridicule everyone else?

Pretty simple really.

Lower heat cap raise heat dissipation.

Using a cap of 30 (TT value), makes shooting 3 PPCs at a time nearly an instant overheat (but not impossible). Buffs all weapons that rely on dps. Anything not PPC gauss or AC/20.

Slight weapon modifications would be needed to ensure balance. Likely increases in the AC/20 and Gauss CD.

The idea is to move the game from DMG -> DPS which in-turn increases skill cap (you have to land more shots on the same location) while remedying ppc superiority through heat, and fixes issues with certain weapons never being viable due to inherent weight/dmg values.

And I don't have to institute any CoF or RNG to do it.

You can combine this with overheat damage if you wish, though I doubt it will be that necessary. Getting huge amount of DPS onto a target that is not moving won't be hard. And it pre-nerfs clan ERPPC stacking, which if unchecked will basically run the game.

Edited by 3rdworld, 14 June 2013 - 10:35 AM.

[DaZur]

Volthorne, on 14 June 2013 - 10:25 AM, said:

How about reticle sway?

You mean like this?

DaZur, on 14 June 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

Reticle at full stop

1 to 33% throttle

34-66% throttle

67 to 100% throttle

[Lostdragon]

Darren Tyler, on 14 June 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

LBX is broken. Obviously a better choice would be the AC20's. Not only would you over heat, but AC20 does more damage. You should not be able to beat a full health Assault mech with ERPPC's in a light mech when the enemy pilot is competent. Light mechs are not for brawling, and you, as a light pilot, should see that. Unlike the other mechs, lights should only strike when the odds are in their favor. If you cannot hide behind cover while getting sniped or you cannot retreat even though you have superior speed, you either must be driving in the open, or you are treating a light mech improperly. Most likely both. Sniping should be prime at long range, it should have a role, it should be useful. You said huge weight disparity as well. So let me add. A light should not beat a Assault 1v1.

And why is the LBX so broken and inferior to the AC20? Because it spreads its damage whereas the AC20 is pin point, thanks for illustrating this point for me, I was actually hoping someone would make that comparison.

And why should a light striker be incapable of killing an assault 1v1? If the light plays smart and uses terrain to his advantage without making mistakes he should be able to beat the assault pilot. In the end it should come down to who is able to best manipulate the battle to his favor and not make mistakes. If the assault puts his back against a wall or moves out into a very open area then if the light doesn't back off he should lose. But if the light goads the assault into chasing him and strikes in terrain favorable to hit and run then he should be able to get the kill if he keeps away from the assault's weapons.

I take down assault and heavy mechs pretty frequently in my Jenners and I don't think anyone can realistically argue that Jenners are OP. I am able to win because I don't fight unless I have the advantage and when that shifts away from me I disengage until conditions are in my favor again. I don't circle and I don't stay in a prolonged fight against more than one mech at a time. I look at the weapon loadouts of my opponents and if I need to pass in front of them I make sure I do it while their weapons are on CD. Playing in this manner takes a lot more effort and concentration than lumbering around and blasting things with PPCs and Gause Rifles, and when I have a great match I feel 10 times more pumped than if I have a great match in my CTF 3D because it is much easier to do well in a 3D.

[ExtremeA79]

DaZur, on 14 June 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

Honestly there are multiple potential ways to address this IMHO, all with their advantages and disadvantages... The reason I support my proposal is that is does not force limitations on hard-point creativity, does not rely on heat or damage number manipulation and does not neuter boats, high-alpha builds or snipers... It just uses a small movement penalty to mitigate their present over-reaching dominance, and encourages class and play-style diversity.

This is a competitive game... i.e. everyone want to win. And it's human nature to migrate to what will give the highest potential to win/kill... As it stands, the overarching meta leans too heavily to the heavyweight side of the scale and I don't think it's being hyperbolic to say that it's damaging the game and and discouraging new players who are not prepared for the heavily tipped scale.

Hardpoint sizes wouldn't neuter boats, it would eliminate boast that were not suppose to boat, and eliminate 6 ppc mechs.
Let us do a example.
EVERYONE KNOWS THE JENNER D AND THE JENNER K. EVERYONE knows that the D is better than the K.
K is more expensive, loses a missile hardpoint, and.comes with ferrofibrious which all mechs can buy if needed. But what cannot be bought is the missile hardpoint lost.
With hardpoint sizes, the jenner D can put 2 srm 4 or 2's and the streak variants. (have the same size, 1 critical)
But the 1 critical size for each harpoint would mean no srm 6 can be fit.
For the K, the missile hardpoint can be big enough to fit a SRM 6. Now, finally there is a reason to buy the K.

For some chassis like the catapult, there can be a different type of hardpoint size, where it is one big box and anything can be fit into it.

[Belorion]

This is unnecessary. If they nerf aiming too much people will stop playing. JJ aim nerf, whatever you can still hit on the way down, but hitting while moving is already hard enough due to uneven ground making your reticule jump.

[Lightfoot]

No. No cones of fire needed. MechWarrior uses hit-boxes to do the same thing. In essence hitboxes simulate a cone of fire

If mechs are not durable enough make the CT hitbox smaller and the arm hitboxes bigger, extending over the mech's shoulder. Now you have a really tough mech that falls apart bit by bit unless your opponent gets a good shot in.

[ExtremeA79]

Lostdragon, on 14 June 2013 - 10:32 AM, said:

And why is the LBX so broken and inferior to the AC20? Because it spreads its damage whereas the AC20 is pin point, thanks for illustrating this point for me, I was actually hoping someone would make that comparison.

And why should a light striker be incapable of killing an assault 1v1? If the light plays smart and uses terrain to his advantage without making mistakes he should be able to beat the assault pilot. In the end it should come down to who is able to best manipulate the battle to his favor and not make mistakes. If the assault puts his back against a wall or moves out into a very open area then if the light doesn't back off he should lose. But if the light goads the assault into chasing him and strikes in terrain favorable to hit and run then he should be able to get the kill if he keeps away from the assault's weapons.

I take down assault and heavy mechs pretty frequently in my Jenners and I don't think anyone can realistically argue that Jenners are OP. I am able to win because I don't fight unless I have the advantage and when that shifts away from me I disengage until conditions are in my favor again. I don't circle and I don't stay in a prolonged fight against more than one mech at a time. I look at the weapon loadouts of my opponents and if I need to pass in front of them I make sure I do it while their weapons are on CD. Playing in this manner takes a lot more effort and concentration than lumbering around and blasting things with PPCs and Gause Rifles, and when I have a great match I feel 10 times more pumped than if I have a great match in my CTF 3D because it is much easier to do well in a 3D.

If both had the same intelligence, at full health, with full ammo, the heavier chassis wins. I take alot of heavier chassis down, because I pick the right time to fight, You able to fight only when you have the advantage is the key to being a light mech, that is how you win. What you do is EXACTLY what I do and that is how I rule in a light mech.

[Lostdragon]

3rdworld, on 14 June 2013 - 10:32 AM, said:

Pretty simple really.

Lower heat cap raise heat dissipation.

Using a cap of 30 (TT value), makes shooting 3 PPCs at a time an instant overheat (but not impossible). Buffs all weapons that rely on dps. Anything not PPC gauss or AC/20.

Slight weapon modifications would be needed to ensure balance. Likely increases in the AC/20 and Gauss CD.

The idea is to move the game from DMG -> DPS which in-turn increases skill cap (you have to land more shots on the same location) while remedying ppc superiority through heat, and fixes issues with certain weapons never being viable due to inherent weight/dmg values.

And I don't have to institute any CoF or RNG to do it.

I agree 100% with this type of heat mechanic but it doesn't change the fact that you can still have a 3 PPC and GR build that does a 45 point alpha to one location, which is still a big issue to me. Sure it shuts down, but it will power back up and be ready to do it again in a few seconds or fire just the GR and finish off what it started with that alpha.

I don't think it is possible to balance the game without making it much harder to put 40-60 points of damage into a single location with one shot.

[3rdworld]

Lostdragon, on 14 June 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

I agree 100% with this type of heat mechanic but it doesn't change the fact that you can still have a 3 PPC and GR build that does a 45 point alpha to one location, which is still a big issue to me. Sure it shuts down, but it will power back up and be ready to do it again in a few seconds or fire just the GR and finish off what it started with that alpha.

I don't think it is possible to balance the game without making it much harder to put 40-60 points of damage into a single location with one shot.

Don't want it to be impossible. the point is that mech now overheated after one shot. overheat damage or dely will keep it from immediately firing again (until all the heat is cleared), unless the pilot believes the cost out weights the reward. Sniping won't be impossible, but it certainly will be of no use in a brawl and will be very risky if completely built for it.

likely those 4 ppc stalker will be staggering their shots, which is the entire point of the system.

Edited by 3rdworld, 14 June 2013 - 10:43 AM.

[Volthorne]

DaZur, on 14 June 2013 - 10:32 AM, said:

You mean like this?

No, going up and down. Side to side makes no ********* sense, unless you're swinging your arms like a cheerleader or some **** like that, and last I checked, 'Mechs weren't cheerleaders.

Edited by Volthorne, 14 June 2013 - 10:43 AM.

[ExtremeA79]

Lostdragon, on 14 June 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

I agree 100% with this type of heat mechanic but it doesn't change the fact that you can still have a 3 PPC and GR build that does a 45 point alpha to one location, which is still a big issue to me. Sure it shuts down, but it will power back up and be ready to do it again in a few seconds or fire just the GR and finish off what it started with that alpha.

I don't think it is possible to balance the game without making it much harder to put 40-60 points of damage into a single location with one shot.

That is why there should also be penalties when your heat is 200%. If my car engine is red hot, turning it off isn't going to stop it from cooking and maybe exploding.

[Blackfire1]

No thank you. I would much prefer for them to hard lock torso convergence to either completely straight or allow the person ,outside of combat, to designate a range of convergence. This would force players to learn every mechs firing pattern and thicken the learning curve compared to point and click.

Arms of course would still converge like they do now.

[Zyllos]

Khell DarkWolf, on 14 June 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

Cone of fire could only be applied to "Projectile" guns such as the ballistics and PPC's since recoil or what have you alters the flight path while in flight.

It would not make sense to apply that to the lasers though because they have no real velocity.

I could see it working for projectiles, but it would take a combination of that and some other means to appease people from screaming that lasers would now be the pinpoint weapon whine.

I'm trying to think of a way overall to see this work on paper.

That is false.

What happens if the "random point" is where the duration of the beam fires within the cone?

[Joseph Mallan]

Aslena, on 14 June 2013 - 10:00 AM, said:

how do they not now? I have a spider and use it daily, my only issue with it is that the c-bill/xp at the end of the match doesn't show my real contribution...

I haven't seen you on the fields so I cannot speak of how you run. But Oh I miss the days of our Scouts running into the thick of it to find the enemy for us to form up against and rain death on.

And you are correct the scout just isn't rewarded enough for providing good intel!

[DaZur]

Darren Tyler, on 14 June 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

Hardpoint sizes wouldn't neuter boats, it would eliminate boast that were not suppose to boat, and eliminate 6 ppc mechs.
Let us do a example.
EVERYONE KNOWS THE JENNER D AND THE JENNER K. EVERYONE knows that the D is better than the K.
K is more expensive, loses a missile hardpoint, and.comes with ferrofibrious which all mechs can buy if needed. But what cannot be bought is the missile hardpoint lost.
With hardpoint sizes, the jenner D can put 2 srm 4 or 2's and the streak variants. (have the same size, 1 critical)
But the 1 critical size for each harpoint would mean no srm 6 can be fit.
For the K, the missile hardpoint can be big enough to fit a SRM 6. Now, finally there is a reason to buy the K.

For some chassis like the catapult, there can be a different type of hardpoint size, where it is one big box and anything can be fit into it.

Understood and I see your point... I'm have to admit I'm torn over what is more damaging to the game meta... The 6 PPC Stalker or the fact that that 6 PPC Stalker can place those 6 PPCs on point at will?

Being slightly sphincter-retentive I do cringe when I see a PPC shot issued from the shoulder of a Dragon or Phract... That said, it's a cosmetic thing for me more than a practical objection...

[Zyllos]

DaZur, on 14 June 2013 - 10:32 AM, said:

You mean like this?

Quote

Reticle at full stop

1 to 33% throttle

34-66% throttle

67 to 100% throttle

While that is an interesting idea, it puts too much emphasis on solely movement.

I would suggest going with Homeless Bill's idea: mwomercs.com/forums/topic/122169-forget-heat-penalties-a-comprehensive-balance-solution-to-alphas-convergence-boats-and-clans/

Basically, there is a fast dissipating value, that if you ever cross the value, a Cone-of-Fire is introduced. Values are calculated before each shot.

If that value gets into extreme numbers, you even begin to lose missile locks, so that it will effect LRMs also.

Each weapon has it's own unique value.

This system could be expanded to include movement, various actions (falling, jump jetting, ect).

Edited by Zyllos, 14 June 2013 - 10:50 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

3rdworld, on 14 June 2013 - 10:42 AM, said:

Don't want it to be impossible. the point is that mech now overheated after one shot. overheat damage or dely will keep it from immediately firing again (until all the heat is cleared), unless the pilot believes the cost out weights the reward. Sniping won't be impossible, but it certainly will be of no use in a brawl and will be very risky if completely built for it.

likely those 4 ppc stalker will be staggering their shots, which is the entire point of the system.

Bipedal Mechs are designed to follow our inner equilibrium. which means arms swing when running full tilt if you ask me.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 14 June 2013 - 10:52 AM.

[Lostdragon]

Darren Tyler, on 14 June 2013 - 10:42 AM, said:

That is why there should also be penalties when your heat is 200%. If my car engine is red hot, turning it off isn't going to stop it from cooking and maybe exploding.

What happens when we get a mech that can fit 3 Gauss Rifles then? Heat is a non-issue. In order to tackle this problem effectively there are 3 basic solutions and you need to implement some combo of two to address every scenario.

1. Make heat more restrictive
2. Restrict hard points
3. Reduce pinpoint damage via reticle sway or CoF or some other mechanism

If you don't do at least two you wind up with a situation where it is still pretty easy to do massive damage to a single location.

[ExtremeA79]

DaZur, on 14 June 2013 - 10:46 AM, said:

Understood and I see your point... I'm have to admit I'm torn over what is more damaging to the game meta... The 6 PPC Stalker or the fact that that 6 PPC Stalker can place those 6 PPCs on point at will?

Being slightly sphincter-retentive I do cringe when I see a PPC shot issued from the shoulder of a Dragon or Phract... That said, it's a cosmetic thing for me more than a practical objection...

You have a point on placing it at will. I also think that SLOWING convergence might do some good. In lore, weapons do not converge at the same speed we have now. Infact, PERFECT accuracy can take as long as 10 seconds. Of course that is too long for this game but slowing convergence will make snipers have to put their crosshair on target for a few seconds before firing for perfect accuracy.