180 replies to this topic

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Didn't really answer my question. Have you read the original dev posts? Don't care how long you've played.

[RG Notch]

WarRats, on 19 June 2013 - 02:11 PM, said:

Your right its not. But it is darn close. I can choose to mount 6 ppcs with no real penalties beyond shutting down. I can choose to use an assault everytime.


Now there is no reason to run 6 ppc's in table top because your mech has a chance of exploding the first time you try to alpha strike. But since there is no restricton why the heck not... it gives me a huge advanatage.

Everbody wants to win the games they play. Some play only to win and some like competition.

I am one who likes competition. I think planning different strategies with a team is a lot of fun. Using different mechs in different roles would make this game great.

You can not currently do this. There is no limits in 8 mans. The majority of time you will face PPCs and whatever other cheese currently works. Very rarily will you find a mixed balanced team that leads to the most fun fair team fight where alternate tactics can be used.

The only way to fight the cheese is to use it yourself. Therefore fun tactics and trying different things go out the window.

This game is self limiting by having a few things be vastly more powerful then others. Players do everything they can to win therfor exploting these powerful things. But that just means the game is unbalenced and only a select few will find it fun to continue to play.

Umm rules and restrictions won't cure any of that. All they will do is change what folks like you call cheese. Not saying the game shouldn't or can't have more tactics. Just stating that people will do whatever it takes to win, all the tightening of rules does is make the choices more clear. Weapon balance is the best way to make real choices. Taking away choices just changes the type of cheese.

[Odins Fist]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 19 June 2013 - 03:02 PM, said:

Didn't really answer my question. Have you read the original dev posts? Don't care how long you've played.

Yes I did, and no I do not care...

That about covers it, and the reality of the situation that many people are still in denial about.

Odins Fist, on 19 June 2013 - 02:53 PM, said:

I did not buy into the founders program, simply because I expected to be disappointed if I would have then didn't get the game I (would have) helped fund to develop.

I saved myself dealing with that entire issue completely.

Edited by Odins Fist, 19 June 2013 - 03:08 PM.

[DocBach]

Odins Fist, on 19 June 2013 - 02:53 PM, said:

Indeed, when has MWO stuck to Table Top rules...

Aren't most of the loadouts people are complaining about "NOT" possible in BattlTech Table Top for I.S. Mechs..??

Again, since when has MWO stuck to BattleTech Table Top rules... It hasn't from the begining of customization.

Going to a canon only set of rules would sink MWO, since MWO is a video game and "NOT" BattleTech Table Top.
Some things wouldn't translate in a way conducive to a multiplayer video game.

Without certain levels of customization MWO would be boring, and quickly uninstalled.



Been in since closed beta, I guess their original vision has changed a little huh.

MWO is "NOT" BattleTech Table Top.. Some things simply do not translate well, obviously.
Please see: MechWarrior Online "Tactics" for Table Top play.

I think you need to understand the table top rules before you make any sort of opinion, because you seem very uneducated on the topic you are trying to argue - the only thing that MWO does differently is engine restrictions - in table top you could only use engine ratings that were divisible by the 'Mechs tonnage to make the math cleaner. Beyond that, the weapons loadouts in MWO could easily be put on a 'Mech using table top rules, but more restrictive heat penalties like suffered movement and accuracy would make them largely ineffective.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Odins Fist, on 19 June 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

Yes I did, and no I do not care...

That about covers it, and the reality of the situation that many people are still in denial about.

If you've read them you'd understand why your arguments look stupid.

So either you haven't read them, or you are being willfully ignorant.

Doc is nicer than I am about it and willing to try and school you. I'm too lazy.

[Odins Fist]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 19 June 2013 - 03:07 PM, said:

If you've read them you'd understand why your arguments look stupid.

So either you haven't read them, or you are being willfully ignorant.

Doc is nicer than I am about it and willing to try and school you. I'm too lazy.

You couldn't school me if you wanted to, period... MWO is based on BattleTech .. no kidding..??
Even the DEVs said a lot of things are hard to impossible to translate from TT to MWO.

Being in denial of the reality of a situation doesn't make the reality any less real..

Also See: MechWarrior Online "Tactics" for Table Top play..

On a side note, the DM/Game master could allow all kinds of crazy non canon amendments to gameplay.

Edited by Odins Fist, 19 June 2013 - 03:20 PM.

[DocBach]

Odins Fist, on 19 June 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

You couldn't school me if you wanted to, period... MWO is based on BattleTech .. no kidding..??
Even the DEVs said a lot of things are hard to impossible to translate from TT to MWO.

Being in denial of the reality of a situation doesn't make the reality any less real..

Also See: MechWarrior Online "Tactics" for Table Top play..

I don't think you get it, dude. They did in fact translate tons of stuff from the table top -- then added their own touches, which breaks the systems that they kept. ie a damage model based off of table top, but giving the players the ability to instantly converge all of their weapons to a single point at any range, leading to weapons capable of doing instant, large damage massively outclassing DPS weapons or spread damage weapons like missiles.

[WarRats]

RG Notch, on 19 June 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

Umm rules and restrictions won't cure any of that. All they will do is change what folks like you call cheese. Not saying the game shouldn't or can't have more tactics. Just stating that people will do whatever it takes to win, all the tightening of rules does is make the choices more clear. Weapon balance is the best way to make real choices. Taking away choices just changes the type of cheese.

If the awesome is the only mech that has 3 ppcs would it make it more viable? Even though its a terribly big ct with legs it gives it something that makes it worth taking.

This would in fact limit the amount of cheese. With weapons balance people find which weapon is the most effective and boat it until it gets old. SRMS, LRMS, streaks, medium lasers, small lasers, large lasers, PPCs have all had their time when they were the best. Under the current system this will not change.

Now by balancing with weapons and by chasis/varients. You can limit the amount of PPCs that one team can field. You can keep LRMs from only being effective in boats.

Now there would still have to be choices to keep players interested but there has to be more limits placed to make this a fun team tactics game.

Edited by WarRats, 19 June 2013 - 03:18 PM.

[Dock Steward]

DocBach, on 19 June 2013 - 03:16 PM, said:

I don't think you get it, dude. They did in fact translate tons of stuff from the table top -- then added their own touches, which breaks the systems that they kept. ie a damage model based off of table top, but giving the players the ability to instantly converge all of their weapons to a single point at any range, leading to weapons capable of doing instant, large damage massively outclassing DPS weapons or spread damage weapons like missiles.

So, really, since they couldn't keep all the rules intact, they should have used them as a basis, but ultimately adapted them all to their purposes, rather than feel beholden to some rules, but very liberal with their changes to others...

Yes?

[DocBach]

Dock Steward, on 19 June 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

So, really, since they couldn't keep all the rules intact, they should have used them as a basis, but ultimately adapted them all to their purposes, rather than feel beholden to some rules, but very liberal with their changes to others...

Yes?

Yes, they needed to decide to either translate the rules as they were and keep it as faithful as possible, or use them as a basis and reinvent them to better suit their vision of the game. Using a little bit from column A and a little bit from column B ends up with column C being a list of unintended imbalances to the system.

[Dock Steward]

DocBach, on 19 June 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:

Yes, they needed to decide to either translate the rules as they were and keep it as faithful as possible, or use them as a basis and reinvent them to better suit their vision of the game. Using a little bit from column A and a little bit from column B ends up with column C being a list of unintended imbalances to the system.

I have to agree with that.

So from where we are with things right now, I would say adapt that heat effect scale from TT and see if that helps balance things. That's not the only thing that I think needs to change, but doesn't that seem like a glaring omission?

[Odins Fist]

DocBach, on 19 June 2013 - 03:16 PM, said:

I don't think you get it, dude. They did in fact translate tons of stuff from the table top -- then added their own touches

No kidding, tons of stuff, but not all... (facepalm) Their own touches are what the ol Hard Core BT guys are still complaining about.

And yeah, I do "get it" dude. It's called the reality of the situation for MWO right now.

Please see: Mechawarrior Online "Tactics" for Table Top (type) gameplay.

At least they were trying to please the old BT guys a little there huh?

Edited by Odins Fist, 19 June 2013 - 03:27 PM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Three things would go a long way. Kill instant convergence (we actually have an elite skill that doesn't nothing because of this). It shouldn't be instant.

Cut the heat limit by half and increase dissipation to compensate.

And then add some effects to running hot.

If you do all of those things you'll see a major shift in the game for the better. And they are all very simple fixes.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 19 June 2013 - 03:26 PM.

[Dock Steward]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 19 June 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

Three things would go a long way. Kill instant convergence (we actually have an elite skill that doesn't nothing because of this). It shouldn't be instant.

Cut the heat limit by half and increase dissipation to compensate.

And then add some effects to running hot.

If you do all of those things you'll see a major shift in the game for the better. And they are all very simple fixes.

I think the heat effects could kill two birds in that it could include a fix for convergence.

I said this in another thread, but if you left convergence as is, but added a heat effect at a certain level that tweaked your crosshairs, in effect messing up the ability to aim properly temporarily, my guess is that convergence would be less of an issue.

Yeah that 1st Alpha would be pinpoint accuracy, but after that you'd never do it again until you cooled down enough.

[DocBach]

Odins Fist, on 19 June 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

At least they were trying to please the old BT guys a little there huh?

that lasted until they suckered us all out of our founders money and decided that players who prefer third person mode was their actual target demographic.

Edited by DocBach, 19 June 2013 - 03:32 PM.

[RG Notch]

WarRats, on 19 June 2013 - 03:16 PM, said:

If the awesome is the only mech that has 3 ppcs would it make it more viable? Even though its a terribly big ct with legs it gives it something that makes it worth taking.

This would in fact limit the amount of cheese. With weapons balance people find which weapon is the most effective and boat it until it gets old. SRMS, LRMS, streaks, medium lasers, small lasers, large lasers, PPCs have all had their time when they were the best. Under the current system this will not change.

Now by balancing with weapons and by chasis/varients. You can limit the amount of PPCs that one team can field. You can keep LRMs from only being effective in boats.

Now there would still have to be choices to keep players interested but there has to be more limits placed to make this a fun team tactics game.

You really don't understand, so I'll let you keep saying the same thing and maybe it will become true.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Dock Steward, on 19 June 2013 - 03:29 PM, said:

I think the heat effects could kill two birds in that it could include a fix for convergence.

I said this in another thread, but if you left convergence as is, but added a heat effect at a certain level that tweaked your crosshairs, in effect messing up the ability to aim properly temporarily, my guess is that convergence would be less of an issue.

Yeah that 1st Alpha would be pinpoint accuracy, but after that you'd never do it again until you cooled down enough.

Except that you'd still have the Dual AC/20 instant convergence problem.

Or dual Gauss.

Or trip U/AC5.

And lest we forget Clan Tech is on the horizon at some point.

I think heat and convergence have to be dealt with independently. If you want there to be an additional penalty to convergence from heat, that's fine.

[WarRats]

Heat scale would fix a lot of things especialy with real penalties. This helps ballence the high energy builds we have been seeing.

I also think tonnage limits on drops would improve the feel of a battle as well. This makes mediums worth taking.

If the varient/refits are not locked at least lock the engines on the chasis. This helps balance lights.

Boating still needs a fix beyond PPCs. I think having set varients/refits is the easiest way to keep it under control.

[Pater Mors]

Dock Steward, on 19 June 2013 - 03:29 PM, said:

I think the heat effects could kill two birds in that it could include a fix for convergence.

I said this in another thread, but if you left convergence as is, but added a heat effect at a certain level that tweaked your crosshairs, in effect messing up the ability to aim properly temporarily, my guess is that convergence would be less of an issue.

Yeah that 1st Alpha would be pinpoint accuracy, but after that you'd never do it again until you cooled down enough.

1st Alpha on a big boat would be pinpoint but you'd:

• Blow heatsinks
  
• Stuff your convergence permanently
  
• Trash your engine output, lowering your top speed and twist speed.
  
• Possibly kill yourself outright

As for ballistics, they need to implement realistic ballistics. No real life ballistics have 100% pinpoint accuracy at all ranges. That's what you get in an arcade game.

[Dock Steward]

Pater Mors, on 19 June 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

1st Alpha on a big boat would be pinpoint but you'd:

• Blow heatsinks
  
• Stuff your convergence permanently
  
• Trash your engine output, lowering your top speed and twist speed.
  
• Possibly kill yourself outright

As for ballistics, they need to implement realistic ballistics. No real life ballistics have 100% pinpoint accuracy at all ranges. That's what you get in an arcade game.

I don't know about making them fully realistic ballistics, but recoil would certainly be a good start. Give each variant a recoil threshold, exceed that and you risk blowing the weapon right out of your mech!

Or falling over...

Edited by Dock Steward, 19 June 2013 - 03:43 PM.