459 replies to this topic

[Aslena]

Lostdragon, on 14 June 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

I don't think sniping should go away. I think sniper weapons should not be the best choice no matter the range.

Flanking and using cover in a light is all well and good but saying they have the advantage over a sniper is ludicrous and makes me wonder if we are playing the same game. I play Jenners a lot lately and if I beat a sniper 1v1 it is because I am a significantly better pilot and he made several mistakes. If I go up against a PPC HGN and come in from behind I have to keep all my lasers on his CT which means I hqve to compensate for terrain changes, my movement, and his movement. If he torso twists I spread damage. If he realizes what is happening and puts his back to a wall I have to disengage or I will die. I need several passes to bring him down and he only needs one good shot to destroy me.

quite honestly if it ever gets to where a Jenner can beat a Highlander without a heck of a lot of work or a bad Highlander pilot then the game is broken... why would anyone use a heavier mech if lights were that much better... Light mechs are supposed to scout, cap, tag, narc, ect... they are NOT assault mechs

[One Medic Army]

Aslena, on 14 June 2013 - 09:49 AM, said:

quite honestly if it ever gets to where a Jenner can beat a Highlander without a heck of a lot of work or a bad Highlander pilot then the game is broken... why would anyone use a heavier mech if lights were that much better... Light mechs are supposed to scout, cap, tag, narc, ect... they are NOT assault mechs

If a highlander pilot who's at all competent can 100% kill a Jenner pilot, why would anyone ever play a Jenner?
Why would anyone play a mech where the entire purpose is to avoid enemy contact because you'll get splattered in one hit?
"Standing in a box" is so exciting compared to actually fighting, it's all I ever wanted to do!

[ExtremeA79]

Aslena, on 14 June 2013 - 09:49 AM, said:

quite honestly if it ever gets to where a Jenner can beat a Highlander without a heck of a lot of work or a bad Highlander pilot then the game is broken... why would anyone use a heavier mech if lights were that much better... Light mechs are supposed to scout, cap, tag, narc, ect... they are NOT assault mechs

EXACTLY.
Oh and BTW sniping SHOULD be useful in range, a prime choice.

One Medic Army, on 14 June 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

If a highlander pilot who's at all competent can 100% kill a Jenner pilot, why would anyone ever play a Jenner?
Why would anyone play a mech where the entire purpose is to avoid enemy contact because you'll get splattered in one hit?
"Standing in a box" is so exciting compared to actually fighting, it's all I ever wanted to do!

(facepalm)

[3rdworld]

Joseph Mallan, on 14 June 2013 - 09:48 AM, said:

Actually the problem we are trying to push our own agenda's when the OP asked a question of preference. Why do I have to agree with "Your" preference if it isn't "Mine"?

Also anyone ever watch Nighttime Tracer fire???

I wanna see someone explain how that works in a "Skill" argument!

and that is relevant how?

Or are you still ******** that there are different skills.

I guess you need to gather all drone pilots, and tell them they are not skilled.

[Aslena]

One Medic Army, on 14 June 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

If a highlander pilot who's at all competent can 100% kill a Jenner pilot, why would anyone ever play a Jenner?
Why would anyone play a mech where the entire purpose is to avoid enemy contact because you'll get splattered in one hit?
"Standing in a box" is so exciting compared to actually fighting, it's all I ever wanted to do!

because this is a team game and light mechs scouting, capping, tagging, and narc abilities add a lot to a TEAM

[Joseph Mallan]

Aslena, on 14 June 2013 - 09:57 AM, said:

because this is a team game and light mechs scouting, capping, tagging, and narc abilities add a lot to a TEAM

Or at least they used to.

[Crimson Fenris]

Cone of fire is only about weapon convergence speed : actually, the convergence speed is so fast you always have pinpoint accuracy at every distance.

But if that mechanism had been correctly implemented, you should always have a "convergence latency" when targeting spots from different distances.
If you aim somewhere, then quickly move to another distance, your system must recalibrate all weapons to match the required precision.

That convergence latency MUST be felt, and the reticle size varying accordingly.

There is honestly nothing more than correct the convergence system to a more slow calibration. Nothing more.

[Aslena]

Joseph Mallan, on 14 June 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

Or at least they used to.

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...

[Lostdragon]

Aslena, on 14 June 2013 - 09:49 AM, said:

quite honestly if it ever gets to where a Jenner can beat a Highlander without a heck of a lot of work or a bad Highlander pilot then the game is broken... why would anyone use a heavier mech if lights were that much better... Light mechs are supposed to scout, cap, tag, narc, ect... they are NOT assault mechs

True to a point, but the Jenner is a striker more than anything else so it needs to be dangerous to every weight. But this is also the reason I gave a second example of two 3Ds with the same alpha damage but different weapons.

[Khell DarkWolf]

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.

[ExtremeA79]

Lostdragon, on 14 June 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

I don't think sniping should go away. I think sniper weapons should not be the best choice no matter the range.

Flanking and using cover in a light is all well and good but saying they have the advantage over a sniper is ludicrous and makes me wonder if we are playing the same game. I play Jenners a lot lately and if I beat a sniper 1v1 it is because I am a significantly better pilot and he made several mistakes. If I go up against a PPC HGN and come in from behind I have to keep all my lasers on his CT which means I hqve to compensate for terrain changes, my movement, and his movement. If he torso twists I spread damage. If he realizes what is happening and puts his back to a wall I have to disengage or I will die. I need several passes to bring him down and he only needs one good shot to destroy me.

But let's use a different example since that is such a huge weight disparity. Let's say I have a CTF 3D with 2x ERPPC and a GR. A 3D with 3 ML and 2x LBX 10 flanks me. He has the same alpha damage as me but I am going to slaughter him because my damage does not get spread at all.

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.

[One Medic Army]

Aslena, on 14 June 2013 - 09:57 AM, said:

because this is a team game and light mechs scouting, capping, tagging, and narc abilities add a lot to a TEAM

Speaking as a player who plays on a 4-man "team" on occasion:
Not all that much.
Tagging, NARCing only does anything if you bring an LRM boat.
Spotting can be done by any mech, it's not restricted to lights.
Capping is boring, and on most maps/in most matches it's completely overshadowed by the results of the main brawl. It's a rare match where a light capping makes a difference.

There's a reason why when I jump in an assault mech, and play at the level of my assault mech Elo there are no light mechs.

Oh, I forgot to mention that you can't really TAG/Spot for LRMs, or even scout very well when most "power" builds these days will Leg or Kill a light mech in a single hit out to 450m.

Edited by One Medic Army, 14 June 2013 - 10:09 AM.

[ExtremeA79]

One Medic Army, on 14 June 2013 - 10:03 AM, said:

Speaking as a player who plays on a 4-man "team" on occasion:
Not all that much.
Tagging, NARCing only does anything if you bring an LRM boat.
Spotting can be done by any mech, it's not restricted to lights.
Capping is boring, and on most maps/in most matches it's completely overshadowed by the results of the main brawl. It's a rare match where a light capping makes a difference.

There's a reason why when I jump in an assault mech, and play at the level of my assault mech Elo there are no light mechs.

NARCING and tagging is only useful if you brin along LRM boats. Which usually doesn't happen in pugs. Games should be balanced in pre made teams, not pugs.

[Aslena]

ELO is really odd how it works... it seems if I get on my missile boat I'm surrounded by other missile boats, if I get on my sniper there are a lot of other snipers, if I get on my spider there are lots of other lights, and so on...

what I am saying is that IF a light mech is as good at killing, faster for caps, better at sneaking around, what's the point of playing any other weight class?

Edited by Aslena, 14 June 2013 - 10:12 AM.

[Funkadelic Mayhem]

and the over 30's attempt to destroy this game further... again!
HELL EFFING NO!

[DaZur]

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?

[ExtremeA79]

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?

Well I DO believe there are better suggestions than THIS to solve boating, such as hardpoint sizes. It would be cool to implement, but I would like to see it as a minor factor.

[Volthorne]

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?

How about reticle sway? Go stomping down a hallway on the flat of your feet and hold your arms like an Atlas would, see how steady you can keep them. Or stand still and have someone punch you in the shoulder and feel what your torso does (hint: it twists up and towards the punch). I have a feeling that proper knock-around from weapons would go quite a way towards balancing things. Yes, you'd get some loadouts that would be ridiculous (x6 AC/2 Jaeger with macros, for example), but done correctly, those would also have their place (not enough shake to massively impact your aim, but one could lock-down a x4-6 PPC Stalker, making his reticle bounce around just enough to mess up his shots).

There, valid solution. For ***** sake, though, do NOT implement a CoF. I already have a hard enough time fighting off single Lights - multiple is a lost cause - in my C1. Don't cripple me further.

[DaZur]

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

Well I DO believe there are better suggestions than THIS to solve boating, such as hardpoint sizes. It would be cool to implement, but I would like to see it as a minor factor.

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.

Edited by DaZur, 14 June 2013 - 10:27 AM.

[soapyfrog]

Cone of fire is already in the game in the form of jump-jet shake (and SRM & LB-10X patterns). Time to take that concept and apply it to pin-point alpha.

All weapons should have an accuracy value that represents standard deviation from the aimpoint (ala world of tanks). However when firing weapons singly (0.5 seconds apart), this value could be ignored, so single weapons fire reatins pinpoint accuracy. Firing weapons in a salvo within 0.5 seconds results in the the deviation being applied and stacked for each weapon.

Lasers would have low deviation values, heavy hitters like big ballistics and PPC would have higher deviation values. Because you only want to spread the impact points of the various weapons in a salvo over multiple armour locations, with possible misses only at long range, the deviation could be very subtle indeed, and since you are stacking you take care of the serious boating problems; suddenly maybe its better to have 2 PPCs firing more frequently and more accurately rather than 6 PPCs fired together but with considerable deviation.

Best part is; no changes required to heat mechanics or any other in game mechanics. Could even substantially reduce jump-jet shake deviation since the combination of jump-jet deviation + multiple weapons fire deviation would be enough to keep pop-tarting nerfed while still making it possible to jump snipe with a single weapon.