64 replies to this topic

[Unbound Inferno]

So, I've been thinking on this whole balance thing we've gotten ourselves into and realized the fundamental reason its an issue;

Accuracy.

In that word is the fundamental core of what is wrong at the moment. The original battletech relied in a dice randomization system for the accuracy of the players to balance out somewhat to get its numbers. This mechwarrior game like so many others lacks that.

In an attempt to get around the damage scale we have been given 2x armor values and a 150% ammo increase – but its not fixing the problem, and we all know that. The rationale of having only 150% ammo when we have 200% armor to punch through already has me questioning many other things.

But there lies the problem, and it gets compounded with instant convergence on the target range or wherever the cursor lands at all distances. We have the full force of the mech in perfect accuracy at almost all times – the entire balance numbers that were intended for randomization is off the charts.

In battletech the accuracy of the weapons was fixed by a forced random factor – modifiable by the player due to certain things, but it had a core random value. That however can’t work very well in the dynamic of this game.

The fundamental core of this piloting simulator is a First-Person point of view, and as such other FPS elements are preferred here to mold around the idea of destructible mech parts. But we mustn't forget the idea of the random factors and current mechanics on how to alleviate this issue of accuracy and overwhelming pinpoint damage.


So here is my question;

(Easier) Should we balance MWO numbers to make it easier and remain more Mechwarrior?

(Harder) Or should we balance the mechanics- specifically accuracy - to make it feel more Battletech?


The easier solution is to revamp the entire damage scale to make mechs last longer. They already started with double armor, but its not enough for the nature of the FPS. We still need working penalties, but just damage scaling, more balance in the numbers of the weapons to get it to work - but its easier since you escape needing to remake the accuracy system to accommodate.

The alternative is that accuracy system but keeping the numbers battletech had. Revamp that like hell, tear down everything everyone knows how to shoot now now and remake it to force a level of inaccuracy. Variable cones of fire, random targeting hitboxes and forced convergence where you can't get perfect pinpoint accuracy all the time. Boil it down to where only the first shot is perfect, then it gets worse as you run hotter - make the system inaccurate to make the mechs last. Its a daunting and huge task needing massive overhauls in weapon convergence, speeds and tracking. Add in a delayed convergence system and random cones of fire for projectiles and wavering accuracy when a mech runs hot. Its a huge task, but I can see the mechanics to make the random hits not too far off from the old battletech.


But this is my question and my poll;

(Easier) Should we balance MWO numbers to make it easier and remain more Mechwarrior?

(Harder) Or should we balance the mechanics- specifically accuracy - to make it feel more Battletech?


What direction do we all as the community feel this should go? Keep the FPS perfect lazy mechwarrior accuracy or make this game actually feel like battletech and not just look like it?

Edited by Unbound Inferno, 23 June 2013 - 09:39 AM.

[Sephlock]

Neither; BATTLEDROIDS FTW!

[Gaan Cathal]

There's a far simpler option you're missing. This game didn't used to have instant convergence, hence the 'faster convergence' perk in the Elite level pilot skills. Re-implementing time-to-converge, ideally making the convergence point the mech you have targeted (defaulting to the ground under cursor otherwise) would go a long way towards solving the issue and keep the FPS-leaning players happy (contrary to the impression you have, we don't all think it's right atm, we are all CoD-loving five year old delinquents with crack habits though) because it solves the problem and the BTech purists happier because it's a 'nerf to teh boats'.

Implementing idea one won't actually do what you want, it will increase the importance of pinpoint high alpha to put damage downrange fast enough to kill anything. The only number that needs increasing in the game right now is Internal Structure (and SRM damage, actually) to make people actually loose -stuff- before blowing up.

Implementing idea two will ruin the enjoyment of anyone who actually likes FPS-type play where aiming skill is part of the equation and not make the TT players who want to play at the same place they played TT at happier because they will still loose horribly, because if someone can beat you with truefire they can beat you with CoF.

Also, it's not 'easier' or 'lazy' you grognard. It's basic good weapon design. Nothing will put noobs out of the door faster than seeing their laser come out of their mech at a 20 degree angle because the RNG says they missed at 10m.

[General Taskeen]

What would people like for; ECM

MechWarrior/BattleTech (how its always been) or Fantasy RPG?

[Homeless Bill]

I vote both.

[Unbound Inferno]

Gaan Cathal, on 20 June 2013 - 02:43 PM, said:

There's a far simpler option you're missing. This game didn't used to have instant convergence, hence the 'faster convergence' perk in the Elite level pilot skills. Re-implementing time-to-converge, ideally making the convergence point the mech you have targeted (defaulting to the ground under cursor otherwise) would go a long way towards solving the issue and keep the FPS-leaning players happy (contrary to the impression you have, we don't all think it's right atm, we are all CoD-loving five year old delinquents with crack habits though) because it solves the problem and the BTech purists happier because it's a 'nerf to teh boats'.

Implementing idea one won't actually do what you want, it will increase the importance of pinpoint high alpha to put damage downrange fast enough to kill anything. The only number that needs increasing in the game right now is Internal Structure (and SRM damage, actually) to make people actually loose -stuff- before blowing up.

Implementing idea two will ruin the enjoyment of anyone who actually likes FPS-type play where aiming skill is part of the equation and not make the TT players who want to play at the same place they played TT at happier because they will still loose horribly, because if someone can beat you with truefire they can beat you with CoF.

Also, it's not 'easier' or 'lazy' you grognard. It's basic good weapon design. Nothing will put noobs out of the door faster than seeing their laser come out of their mech at a 20 degree angle because the RNG says they missed at 10m.

You misunderstand then, horrifically.

The idea isn't drastic. It means you planned to aim CT and your shot is off a meter so it hits the arm. Inaccuracy of a variable scale but doesn't make you do something you didn't intend. Your shot should have hit, so it'll hit - however it may vary slightly off where you intended. It means damage gets spread out.

Also, it is easy to ignore the main problem and add band-aid instead of really work and fix it. Or lazy to ignore it completely.

Edited by Unbound Inferno, 20 June 2013 - 03:28 PM.

[Gaan Cathal]

Unbound Inferno, on 20 June 2013 - 03:27 PM, said:

You misunderstand then, horrifically.

The idea isn't drastic. It means you planned to aim CT and your shot is off a meter so it hits the arm. Inaccuracy of a variable scale but doesn't make you do something you didn't intend. Your shot should have hit, so it'll hit - however it may vary slightly off where you intended. It means damage gets spread out.

Also, it is easy to ignore the main problem and add band-aid instead of really work and fix it. Or lazy to ignore it completely.

Exaggeration for effect on my part, although some CoF systems do actually produce that effect though, and we can't say PGI have never accidentally let something utterly ridiculous through their QA before (LRMpocalypse comes to mind).

That said, CoF will drive people away by taking control of their mech out of their hands. Re-implementing convergence won't. Both will reduce the easy pinpoint alphas. One (convergence) can be partially mitigated by intentional player action (aka skill) and the other (CoF) is entirely arbitrary. Additionally, the code for one is already in the game, and has a pilot skill associated with it (convergence) and the other would require recoding a huge chunk of the weapon fire mechanics.

Convergence > Cone of Fire. Drastically so.

[Peter2000]

Gaan Cathal, on 20 June 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

Exaggeration for effect on my part, although some CoF systems do actually produce that effect though, and we can't say PGI have never accidentally let something utterly ridiculous through their QA before (LRMpocalypse comes to mind).

That said, CoF will drive people away by taking control of their mech out of their hands. Re-implementing convergence won't. Both will reduce the easy pinpoint alphas. One (convergence) can be partially mitigated by intentional player action (aka skill) and the other (CoF) is entirely arbitrary. Additionally, the code for one is already in the game, and has a pilot skill associated with it (convergence) and the other would require recoding a huge chunk of the weapon fire mechanics.

Convergence > Cone of Fire. Drastically so.

Interesting idea. I've rarely encountered convergence-adjustment problems (convergence issues while "leading" a fast moving target against an out-of-bounds-region are a separate convergence-distance issue). It would certainly add some more interesting mechanics to the game.

I'd like to be able to test it though, before accepting it as a solution. It may introduce many other issues.

Here's to the devs testing more things, in a non-permanent fashion during this (alleged) Beta...

Edited by Peter2000, 20 June 2013 - 04:43 PM.

[Xeno Phalcon]

One of these days ill be able to wander around the back alleys of luthien hoping to get some medium lasers off the black market with a charisma check, but alas this is the closest im going to get. (Its either this or the ******* child of hawken and COD known as Titanfall)

[Funkadelic Mayhem]

I chose the 4th option, cheese.

[Tombstoner]

Xeno Phalcon, on 20 June 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:

One of these days ill be able to wander around the back alleys of luthien hoping to get some medium lasers off the black market with a charisma check, but alas this is the closest im going to get. (Its either this or the ******* child of hawken and COD known as Titanfall)

i watched Titanfall and i can see lots of watered down came play. its realy all about the big suits. The small infranty seem to be unable to hit anything unless they are standing still. i can see why the high damage alpha is popular. its pandemic in FPS. its conditioned player to expect rapid death and rewards players for map mastery, often confused with SKILL. i have loathed every FSP multi player since Tribes. That FPS was fantastic. COD, ghost recon and its ilk are posioning the PC player base with console based game play.

[CancR]

Harder!

It really crushes my spirits to see so much noob streak saturation because with 2 missile hard points its no real investment and with 2 streaks, it only takes 6 streak hit (from just 2 streak missiles) to kill a light.

This is a weapon where you look at a mech for a second and have target lock, and never lose it . Mix streak rules up from the MW:LL where they have to lock on, but then they just follow the crosshairs AND they lose lock each time they fire and then we can talk about skill.

[Pinselborste]

yeah, mwll streaks where nicely done, you look on the target, and than they are semi guided, if you aim at the side of the mech while firing streaks, they will hit side Torso and arm.

[Mackman]

Where's Option 4? "Refusing to vote because the poll is an incredibly biased piece of garbage"

Did I miss something? Is this game "Battletech Online"? Because if so, then i'm sorry and I'll leave immediately. But on my screen, it still says MechWarrior Online; meaning that specifically Battletech rules, especially those having to do with a turn-based, dice-based tabletop game, have nothing to do with this game.

If PGI implements anything more than an extremely minor CoF, it's going to drive players away in droves. Randomized hitboxes? Are you serious, dude? The majority of people playing this game don't want Battletech Online: They want Mechwarrior Online.

Also, the way you're framing this debate as "Are you agreeing with me, or are you lazy and stupid?" is incredibly irritating. It makes you seem like a smug *********. So if you don't want to seem that way, I'd suggest you tone down the rhetoric a bit.

[Monky]

BATTLETOADS!

Also this poll is bunk.

[PEEFsmash]

It was very hard to decide what to do until I noticed that the game is called Mechwarrior Online.

-____-

[LordBraxton]

Mechwarrior IS battletech

the goal should be to make a game that feels as much like the battletech mythos as possible

previous mechwarrior games were limited by technology, with the tech we have now

making a battletech sim should be easy(ier)

why would you CHOOSE to base gameplay mechanics on games from 10+ years ago, rather than trying to make a game that truly captures the spirit of it's parent universe?

Mackman, on 20 June 2013 - 06:04 PM, said:

Where's Option 4? "Refusing to vote because the poll is an incredibly biased piece of garbage"

Did I miss something? Is this game "Battletech Online"? Because if so, then i'm sorry and I'll leave immediately. But on my screen, it still says MechWarrior Online; meaning that specifically Battletech rules, especially those having to do with a turn-based, dice-based tabletop game, have nothing to do with this game.

If PGI implements anything more than an extremely minor CoF, it's going to drive players away in droves. Randomized hitboxes? Are you serious, dude? The majority of people playing this game don't want Battletech Online: They want Mechwarrior Online.

Also, the way you're framing this debate as "Are you agreeing with me, or are you lazy and stupid?" is incredibly irritating. It makes you seem like a smug *********. So if you don't want to seem that way, I'd suggest you tone down the rhetoric a bit.

battletech is the entire universe

mechwarrior online and battletech online are synonymous, I don't understand your argument at all.

If anything, arguing that the title 'Mechwarrior', should shape the game

is arguing that it should be a role playing game where you are only in your mech half of the time, and the other half you are adventuring as your pilot, on various planets throughout the inner sphere.

Edited by LordBraxton, 20 June 2013 - 06:59 PM.

[PEEFsmash]

LordBraxton, on 20 June 2013 - 06:58 PM, said:

why would you CHOOSE to base gameplay mechanics on games from 10+ years ago, rather than trying to make a game that truly captures the spirit of it's parent universe?

You mean, why would you CHOOSE to base gameplay on mechanics on games from 10+ years ago, rather than basing gameplay on 30 year old inconsistent books and board games?

[Victor Morson]

I love BattleTech. A lot.

Trying to use TT rules - which have HUGE HUGE HUGE balance problems on par with PGI's worst - as a bible is a terrible idea. A jumping off point, sure.

The only TT book of interest to MW:O balancing is the Solaris books, which they've already borrowed several pages from with things like the faster AC fire rates. Those rules also had aiming and such.

EDIT: For all the crap we give PGI, let us not forget the holy FASA gave us stuff like Double Heat Sinks that double the engine amount in the first place, let alone hilariously terrible AC/2s and 5s (There's no arguing even if they aren't GREAT here, they're far better than on TT) and I won't even mention how they balanced the Clans with Zell.. and so, so many terrible 'mechs.. and the customization rules make the worst "boats" people complain about here look like baby's first battlemech over there......... yeah. We need to stop putting FASA an altar and start taking their good ideas and converting the feel to MW:O, which they've more or less done a good job at barring tweaks.

Seriously though I think Table Top needs a reboot, not time jump to be brought up to modern war gaming rules, without targeting 14 year olds like Dark Age and instead going for more serious war gamers again. We still exist.

Edited by Victor Morson, 20 June 2013 - 07:17 PM.

[Nauht]

Absolutely no to randomised hits when stationary. When moving, sure a small cone would be acceptable as nothing has pinpoint accuracy on the move, especially against another moving target but when you're dead still and took time to take a bead of gour target your shots should hit exactly where you aimed it.

It'd be too frustrating to see shots not hit where you aimed it, taking out an element of skill. Yes there is skill in aiming and landing shots, just cos you cant do it as well as someone else doesnt mean you should make everyone at the same level of suckiness.

Broader answer to the OP - they started with TT values and everything has evolved since then. Weapon damage, heat, armour. So more MWO was needed, not TT. In the early days I was in the TT camp but as the game evolved could see that most deviations were for the better.