Main problem is fire rate, stuff just fires too fast, then you have the ability to target locations as opposed to random location hitting, and ppc's not only do they fire too fast, they don't even build up the heat from TT specs, AC's with their front load damage doesn't help either, MW3 had fire rates down pat as well as how autocannons should shoot, why didn't they just try the 5 sec rule? stuff will still be firing fast enough to get kills.
And the main problem, the heat cap is way too high I could have sworn heat cap was supposed to be 30 heat points not 60.
Honestly once fire rates are brought into line as well as the heat cap, things should be better.
0
Problem With This Game Is Fire Rate, And Other Things
Started by Scryed, Jun 15 2013 07:47 PM
27 replies to this topic
#2
-
-
- Philanthropist
- 1,280 posts
Member
- LocationLos Angeles
Posted 15 June 2013 - 07:53 PM
You are wrong about everything you posted, but you did give me a good idea while I was waiting for the page to load. We could halve the damage of everything and double the fire rate. This would eliminate 1 shotting and would keep things skill based instead of praying to RNGeezus.
#4
-
-
- Moderate Giver
- 274 posts
Member
Posted 15 June 2013 - 09:10 PM
jesus christ why do people think the TT is perfect and ballanced for a real time game...its not
the fire rates of the guns are fine, its to keep the action going, if we stuck to the true TT rules the game would not be fun, and after all a game lives or dies on its fun factor.
a true battletech game would be considered a 'dad' game far to slow and far to...not fun
think about what you suggested for a second, if we lower the heat cap we would have alot more time to contemplate the meaning of existence whilst we look around out pretty cockpits
the fire rates of the guns are fine, its to keep the action going, if we stuck to the true TT rules the game would not be fun, and after all a game lives or dies on its fun factor.
a true battletech game would be considered a 'dad' game far to slow and far to...not fun
think about what you suggested for a second, if we lower the heat cap we would have alot more time to contemplate the meaning of existence whilst we look around out pretty cockpits
#5
-
-
- 496 posts
Member
Posted 15 June 2013 - 09:26 PM
Actually slowing some weapons down slightly might not hurt, and 5 seconds isn't that long (now the 10 second TT turns would be a serious problem)
Personally I think they should make Missiles a little more dangerous, but slow their fire rates by 1.5 to 2 times. Might not be a horrible way to modify gauss either, a 0.5 or 1 second longer cooldown would leave it good, but would reduce it brawling power noticeably. (right now gauss is not OP, but hard to say what future changes will bring)
The thing is though I think this should be used as a later form of balance. First they need to fix some bugs (hits not registering, hits impacting invisible walls), and rework some game mechanics (Heat system, Convergence)
Until the system it all is built on is made to work better, balance is a pipe dream.
Personally I think they should make Missiles a little more dangerous, but slow their fire rates by 1.5 to 2 times. Might not be a horrible way to modify gauss either, a 0.5 or 1 second longer cooldown would leave it good, but would reduce it brawling power noticeably. (right now gauss is not OP, but hard to say what future changes will bring)
The thing is though I think this should be used as a later form of balance. First they need to fix some bugs (hits not registering, hits impacting invisible walls), and rework some game mechanics (Heat system, Convergence)
Until the system it all is built on is made to work better, balance is a pipe dream.
#6
-
-
- The Steadfast
- 2,539 posts
Member
- LocationSW Florida
Posted 15 June 2013 - 09:55 PM
In MW3, maps were bigger and the fights longer. Slow fire rate was acceptable because of these two parameters.
MW:O has been designed for 15min, with an average game time of between 5 and 10 minutes. The maps are smaller to encourage initial contact sooner. Increasing fire rate would go counter to the game play the MW:O team has established.
Now whether or not the small maps, shorter game time is an ideal set up is debatable. Personally I prefer it because I can get 2 to 3 matches in when I have some spare time. Increasing the refire rate would require longer matches and that is something I would be against.
MW:O has been designed for 15min, with an average game time of between 5 and 10 minutes. The maps are smaller to encourage initial contact sooner. Increasing fire rate would go counter to the game play the MW:O team has established.
Now whether or not the small maps, shorter game time is an ideal set up is debatable. Personally I prefer it because I can get 2 to 3 matches in when I have some spare time. Increasing the refire rate would require longer matches and that is something I would be against.
#7
-
-
- Elite Founder
- 218 posts
Member
Posted 16 June 2013 - 01:21 PM
Derrpy, on 15 June 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:
jesus christ why do people think the TT is perfect and ballanced for a real time game...its not
the fire rates of the guns are fine, its to keep the action going, if we stuck to the true TT rules the game would not be fun, and after all a game lives or dies on its fun factor.
a true battletech game would be considered a 'dad' game far to slow and far to...not fun
think about what you suggested for a second, if we lower the heat cap we would have alot more time to contemplate the meaning of existence whilst we look around out pretty cockpits
the fire rates of the guns are fine, its to keep the action going, if we stuck to the true TT rules the game would not be fun, and after all a game lives or dies on its fun factor.
a true battletech game would be considered a 'dad' game far to slow and far to...not fun
think about what you suggested for a second, if we lower the heat cap we would have alot more time to contemplate the meaning of existence whilst we look around out pretty cockpits
The whole point of the heat cap was to see who knew how to manage heat and who didn't, last I checked you can't get more skill based than that.
5 secs should be the base for all weapon fire rates I think, then adjust from there, cause when you can fire 4 ppcs and not shut down, something is wrong.
#8
-
-
- Mercenary
- 4,763 posts
Member
- LocationAurora, Indiana, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way
Posted 16 June 2013 - 03:16 PM
The heat cap is determined by taking the base 20, and adding +1 for a SHS and +2 for a DHS. The bonus for HSs is from the TT, where you only apply heat to the scale only after deducting the heat dissipation of your HSs.
This system works fine, if you have penalties that increase as you climb the scale. MWO lacks these. Add them in and a lot of problems get solved.
ROF is a great place for PGI to balance weapons. Sniper weapons should have longer reload timers, brawler weapons should have faster fire rates, hard-hitting alpha weapons should have moderate-to-slow fire rates, and low damage dakka weapons should have very high fire rates.
What this does is it differentiates weapons into different roles. PPC going to 4s CD (and the Gauss before it) was a boost to brawlers, but not sufficient. If the PPC went to 4.25s and the ERPPC to 4.5s then we'd see a marked change in brawling success.
SRMs getting faster fire rates (a quarter second improvement each), and SSRMs taking an extra quarter second to reload (so net of half a second slower than the standard SRM equivalent), would help the SSRM and SRM find their places in the battlefield with SRMs becoming very strong brawling options and SSRMs being more a secondary weapon used when ammo efficiency is an issue.
Pulse lasers having their recharge time dropped by a quarter second and their burn time reduced by another quarter second would really help them to become better brawling options, while their heat load, range loss, and weight disadvantage would make standard lasers a better option for open engagements - again, giving both sets of weapons their own roles.
The AC2 has a role as an extreme-range dakka weapon. The UAC5 has a role as a burst weapon, though it's too strong right now as a flat dps option as well. The AC5 is too weak even with the recent rate of fire buff and range boost and needs a slight increase in fire rate to really come into its own, while the UAC5 needs its base fire rate to be lower and double-tapping to be a bigger part of its burst damage output. Maybe a rework of the jamming mechanic would be necessary to encourage burst performance while limiting effective dps.
The AC10 is the odd-weapon-out in the AC line, and needs to be a bit cooler and a bit faster-firing to compete with the other options (it sacrifices too much from the AC20 for the increased range and rate of fire). If it were to move to a 2s reload time or so it would be better, but a 1 heat reduction might be in order too.
The LB-10X has no place. Increasing pellet damage to 1.5 would make it a strong brawling choice and a mediocre ranged option. It'd actually be able to take some advantage of its boosted range relative to the standard AC10, since even one or two pellets hitting would have half again the damage of its current state. Up close it'd be on the same level as a Gauss, though not concentrated like the heavier, longer-ranged weapon is. With a damage boost it might not need a rate of fire boost like the standard aC10 should get, which would further differentiate the standard AC10 from the LB-10X.
Note that most of these fixes involve changing the rate of fire, though usually be only a small margin. Other areas would still need work, such as range, burn time, damage, tracking, projectile speed, etc., but rate of fire is the starting point.
This system works fine, if you have penalties that increase as you climb the scale. MWO lacks these. Add them in and a lot of problems get solved.
ROF is a great place for PGI to balance weapons. Sniper weapons should have longer reload timers, brawler weapons should have faster fire rates, hard-hitting alpha weapons should have moderate-to-slow fire rates, and low damage dakka weapons should have very high fire rates.
What this does is it differentiates weapons into different roles. PPC going to 4s CD (and the Gauss before it) was a boost to brawlers, but not sufficient. If the PPC went to 4.25s and the ERPPC to 4.5s then we'd see a marked change in brawling success.
SRMs getting faster fire rates (a quarter second improvement each), and SSRMs taking an extra quarter second to reload (so net of half a second slower than the standard SRM equivalent), would help the SSRM and SRM find their places in the battlefield with SRMs becoming very strong brawling options and SSRMs being more a secondary weapon used when ammo efficiency is an issue.
Pulse lasers having their recharge time dropped by a quarter second and their burn time reduced by another quarter second would really help them to become better brawling options, while their heat load, range loss, and weight disadvantage would make standard lasers a better option for open engagements - again, giving both sets of weapons their own roles.
The AC2 has a role as an extreme-range dakka weapon. The UAC5 has a role as a burst weapon, though it's too strong right now as a flat dps option as well. The AC5 is too weak even with the recent rate of fire buff and range boost and needs a slight increase in fire rate to really come into its own, while the UAC5 needs its base fire rate to be lower and double-tapping to be a bigger part of its burst damage output. Maybe a rework of the jamming mechanic would be necessary to encourage burst performance while limiting effective dps.
The AC10 is the odd-weapon-out in the AC line, and needs to be a bit cooler and a bit faster-firing to compete with the other options (it sacrifices too much from the AC20 for the increased range and rate of fire). If it were to move to a 2s reload time or so it would be better, but a 1 heat reduction might be in order too.
The LB-10X has no place. Increasing pellet damage to 1.5 would make it a strong brawling choice and a mediocre ranged option. It'd actually be able to take some advantage of its boosted range relative to the standard AC10, since even one or two pellets hitting would have half again the damage of its current state. Up close it'd be on the same level as a Gauss, though not concentrated like the heavier, longer-ranged weapon is. With a damage boost it might not need a rate of fire boost like the standard aC10 should get, which would further differentiate the standard AC10 from the LB-10X.
Note that most of these fixes involve changing the rate of fire, though usually be only a small margin. Other areas would still need work, such as range, burn time, damage, tracking, projectile speed, etc., but rate of fire is the starting point.
#9
-
-
- Elite Founder
- 218 posts
Member
Posted 21 June 2013 - 10:19 AM
Rate of fire is too high, hence why ppc's rule right now, they fire every 4 seconds, too fast for such a large weapon I think, it should be 5-6 seconds minimum.
They should have just went with the 5 sec base, then adjusted from there, and fix convergence, make it slower so that when tech comes out i.e. Targeting computer, it will actually be worth something instead of being completely useless.
Heat cap is still too high, that really needs to be lowered.
They should have just went with the 5 sec base, then adjusted from there, and fix convergence, make it slower so that when tech comes out i.e. Targeting computer, it will actually be worth something instead of being completely useless.
Heat cap is still too high, that really needs to be lowered.
Edited by Scryed, 21 June 2013 - 10:20 AM.
#10
-
-
- The Nimble
- 5,136 posts
Member
- LocationPlymouth, MN
Posted 21 June 2013 - 10:29 AM
Derrpy, on 15 June 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:
jesus christ why do people think the TT is perfect and ballanced for a real time game...its not
the fire rates of the guns are fine, its to keep the action going, if we stuck to the true TT rules the game would not be fun, and after all a game lives or dies on its fun factor.
a true battletech game would be considered a 'dad' game far to slow and far to...not fun
think about what you suggested for a second, if we lower the heat cap we would have alot more time to contemplate the meaning of existence whilst we look around out pretty cockpits
the fire rates of the guns are fine, its to keep the action going, if we stuck to the true TT rules the game would not be fun, and after all a game lives or dies on its fun factor.
a true battletech game would be considered a 'dad' game far to slow and far to...not fun
think about what you suggested for a second, if we lower the heat cap we would have alot more time to contemplate the meaning of existence whilst we look around out pretty cockpits
I don't think you realize how many "dads" play this game and would kick you butt in either version.
Again... or should I say for the third time today?
It's easy to up RoF and stick to TT values.
Figure out the RoF, Compare it to the RoF of 10. Adjust heat and damage accordinglye. PPC fires every 5 seconds so half damage and heat for 5 damage and 4.5 heat per shot. Now it fires fast but huge alphas are much less prevalent. For lasers just make them always on when you trigger them. each tick could be like .1 of a second and do .05 damage and .03 heat for a Medium laser. Bathing a mech in lasers would eventually melt the armor right off it.
#11
-
-
- Overlord
- 7,308 posts
Member
- LocationRTP, NC
Posted 21 June 2013 - 10:32 AM
Firing faster is better and more fun actually, its just the heat is supposed to help limit it and unfortunately certain weapons *do I really need to cough* PPCs *yes I did need to cough* don't build up as much heat as they should.
#12
-
-
- Moderate Giver
- 1,969 posts
Member
- LocationToronto, ON
Posted 21 June 2013 - 10:37 AM
Derrpy, on 15 June 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:
think about what you suggested for a second, if we lower the heat cap we would have alot more time to contemplate the meaning of existence whilst we look around out pretty cockpits
Or you could learn to manage the heat of your 'Mech as opposed to just ALPHA EVERYTHING.
#13
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 3,111 posts
Member
- LocationThe North
Posted 21 June 2013 - 10:38 AM
Derrpy, on 15 June 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:
jesus christ why do people think the TT is perfect and ballanced for a real time game...its not
the fire rates of the guns are fine, its to keep the action going, if we stuck to the true TT rules the game would not be fun, and after all a game lives or dies on its fun factor.
a true battletech game would be considered a 'dad' game far to slow and far to...not fun
think about what you suggested for a second, if we lower the heat cap we would have alot more time to contemplate the meaning of existence whilst we look around out pretty cockpits
the fire rates of the guns are fine, its to keep the action going, if we stuck to the true TT rules the game would not be fun, and after all a game lives or dies on its fun factor.
a true battletech game would be considered a 'dad' game far to slow and far to...not fun
think about what you suggested for a second, if we lower the heat cap we would have alot more time to contemplate the meaning of existence whilst we look around out pretty cockpits
^.... This
MWO is "NOT" friggin Table Top BattleTech... MWO is "NOT" a turn based (throw the dice) game.
MWO is a "you better get some cover" game..
If MWO acted like BT/TT, it would have been uninstalled ASAP..
Wait, wasn't MechWarrior Online "Tactics" suppossed to make the old BattleTech Table Top guys happy..??
Gee what happened there.??
Edited by Odins Fist, 21 June 2013 - 10:39 AM.
#14
-
-
- The Nimble
- 5,136 posts
Member
- LocationPlymouth, MN
Posted 21 June 2013 - 10:53 AM
Odins Fist, on 21 June 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:
^.... This
MWO is "NOT" friggin Table Top BattleTech... MWO is "NOT" a turn based (throw the dice) game.
Nope but it is Battletech. Can't have Mechwarrior without battletech or it would simply be... Um.. nothing.
Odins Fist, on 21 June 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:
MWO is a "you better get some cover" game..
Odins Fist, on 21 June 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:
If MWO acted like BT/TT, it would have been uninstalled ASAP..
Odins Fist, on 21 June 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:
Wait, wasn't MechWarrior Online "Tactics" suppossed to make the old BattleTech Table Top guys happy..??
Gee what happened there.??
Gee what happened there.??
Apparently you have never heard of MegaMek which existed long before Mechwarrior Tactics and is vastly superior. We have digital TT. We want a Mech Simulation game set in the Battletech/Mechwarrior Universe... hey look.. MWO!
#15
-
-
- 5,737 posts
Member
- LocationCircinus
Posted 21 June 2013 - 10:53 AM
^ oh its not table top?
Last time I checked I have to roll 2D6 in order to get a map, you also roll for what team mates you get solo
You also roll 2D6 to fire a bad UAC mechanic
See? Its not completely stamped out, lol.
Last time I checked I have to roll 2D6 in order to get a map, you also roll for what team mates you get solo
You also roll 2D6 to fire a bad UAC mechanic
See? Its not completely stamped out, lol.
#16
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 3,111 posts
Member
- LocationThe North
Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:14 AM
Mercules, on 21 June 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:
Nope but it is Battletech. Can't have Mechwarrior without battletech or it would simply be... Um.. nothing.
Gee Whiz Wally.... No kidding MechWarrior Online is based on BattleTech..?? Wow I dodn't know that at all (facepalm).
Are you really that dense to think I didn't know..?? You have got to be trolling.
The fact remains that the old "TURN BASED" table top game and MechWarrior Online are two completely different animals in the way they are played, and how they behave..
Maybe you should grab your old Crown Royal bag full of dice, pull out a few, and throw them at your computer screen everytime you want to fire your weapons, and pray that you get a hit.
Maybe your Dasher can move 12 Hexes and get behind an Atlas and core it...
Oooops fail on roll, the DM states your Dasher tripped over an obstacle, and you do a faceplant (1) Hex in front of the Atlas.
Yep, MechWarrior Online is completely "BASED" on BattleTech, but some things are not going to TRANSLATE over as well as some people would like.. Too Bad.. And now you have a stuck pixel on your 24" Monitor because a Die-4 smacked it too hard.
Oh wait... Founders Tag... Yeah I didn't do that because I didn't want to have helped fund a game that didn't meet all of my expectations, then cry about it, and then get called out on it..
You see, I completely avoided having to deal with that situation..
Big expectations often lead to disappointment..
Edited by Odins Fist, 21 June 2013 - 11:16 AM.
#17
-
-
- The Nimble
- 5,136 posts
Member
- LocationPlymouth, MN
Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:20 AM
Odins Fist, on 21 June 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:
Gee Whiz Wally.... No kidding MechWarrior Online is based on BattleTech..?? Wow I dodn't know that at all (facepalm).
Are you really that dense to think I didn't know..?? You have got to be trolling.
The fact remains that the old "TURN BASED" table top game and MechWarrior Online are two completely different animals in the way they are played, and how they behave..
Maybe you should grab your old Crown Royal bag full of dice, pull out a few, and throw them at your computer screen everytime you want to fire your weapons, and pray that you get a hit.
Maybe your Dasher can move 12 Hexes and get behind an Atlas and core it...
Oooops fail on roll, the DM states your Dasher tripped over an obstacle, and you do a faceplant (1) Hex in front of the Atlas.
Yep, MechWarrior Online is completely "BASED" on BattleTech, but some things are not going to translate over as well as some people would like.. Too Bad.. And now you have a stuck pixel on your 24" Monitor because a Die-4 smacked it too hard.
Oh wait... Founders Tag... Yeah I didn't do that because I didn't want to have helped fund a game that didn't meet all of my expectations, then cry about it, and then get called out on it..
You see, I completely avoided having to deal with that situation..
Big expectations often lead to disappointment..
Nice attempted insult. Never owned a Crown Royal bag.
Your ignorance is also showing, Battletech doesn't have a Dungeon Master nor would a Battletech player have a 4-sided die. If you know nothing about TT you can't claim "There are things that wouldn't translate well." Okay, give me an example of that... but if you never played it or read the rules you can't because you don't know what TT even is to know it won't translate.
#18
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 3,111 posts
Member
- LocationThe North
Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:27 AM
Mercules, on 21 June 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:
Nice attempted insult. Never owned a Crown Royal bag.
Your ignorance is also showing, Battletech doesn't have a Dungeon Master nor would a Battletech player have a 4-sided die.Attempt... OK
(Facepalm)... Really no Die-4 or a DM, no kidding.. Wow you are dense.
QUESTION: Do you have a hard time understanding what's happening around you or what..??
Mercules, on 21 June 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:
If you know nothing about TT you can't claim "There are things that wouldn't translate well." Okay, give me an example of that... but if you never played it or read the rules you can't because you don't know what TT even is to know it won't translate.
Turn based play.. Dice Rolls... Strictly using TT stats for weapons.. Etc, Etc, Etc,..
Really man..??? Really..??
See how MechWarrior Online is NOT Table Top..??
Edited by Odins Fist, 21 June 2013 - 11:40 AM.
#19
-
-
- 766 posts
Member
Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:29 AM
Dracol, on 15 June 2013 - 09:55 PM, said:
In MW3, maps were bigger and the fights longer. Slow fire rate was acceptable because of these two parameters.
MW:O has been designed for 15min, with an average game time of between 5 and 10 minutes. The maps are smaller to encourage initial contact sooner. Increasing fire rate would go counter to the game play the MW:O team has established.
Now whether or not the small maps, shorter game time is an ideal set up is debatable. Personally I prefer it because I can get 2 to 3 matches in when I have some spare time. Increasing the refire rate would require longer matches and that is something I would be against.
MW:O has been designed for 15min, with an average game time of between 5 and 10 minutes. The maps are smaller to encourage initial contact sooner. Increasing fire rate would go counter to the game play the MW:O team has established.
Now whether or not the small maps, shorter game time is an ideal set up is debatable. Personally I prefer it because I can get 2 to 3 matches in when I have some spare time. Increasing the refire rate would require longer matches and that is something I would be against.
Excatly why this game is Mechassault 3 and not MW 5. Oh, and now you can BUY powerups.
#20
-
-
- The Nimble
- 5,136 posts
Member
- LocationPlymouth, MN
Posted 21 June 2013 - 11:39 AM
Odins Fist, on 21 June 2013 - 11:27 AM, said:
Attempt... OK
(Facepalm)... Really no Die-4 or a DM, no kidding.. Wow you are dense.
QUESTION: Do you have a hard time understanding what's happening around you or what..??
Turn based play.. Dice Rolls... Strictly using TT stats for weapons.. Etc, Etc, Etc,..
Really man..??? Really..??
(Facepalm)... Really no Die-4 or a DM, no kidding.. Wow you are dense.
QUESTION: Do you have a hard time understanding what's happening around you or what..??
Turn based play.. Dice Rolls... Strictly using TT stats for weapons.. Etc, Etc, Etc,..
Really man..??? Really..??
Did you purposefully make yourself sound more ignorant? If so... why? So that you could be a bit more sarcastic in your reply and further break the forum rules? I'm afraid I gave you the benefit of the doubt and took you are being a least partially serious and not just an ***. My mistake.
I understand your attempt very well. I also understand the difference between turn based and real time. I have been playing real time games based off turn based games since the early 90's. I've been hearing since the early 90's, "You can't do that, some things won't translate." and seen very few correct assumptions from people who do not understand the TT medium.
Again... what doesn't translate SPECIFICALLY?
7 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 7 guests, 0 anonymous users
