471 replies to this topic

[jakucha]

Lostdragon, on 24 June 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

Heat by itself is a temporary fix at best. What happens when there is a mech that can mount 3x Gauss Rifles? If you don't address the issue in at least two ways (heat, convergence, hard point limitations) then you won't solve anything long term.

Gauss rifles aren't the big issue though, as they have some big downsides being fragile and limited ammo, and fairly heavy. Heat isn't a temporary fix, it affects all the weapons people think of as OP.

Edited by jakucha, 24 June 2013 - 10:26 AM.

[Roland]

I wrote up a post talking about some more of the balance issues in the game, but then I just deleted it because I don't think it's actually gonna change much to talk about it.

[Tombstoner]

Roland, on 24 June 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

I wrote up a post talking about some more of the balance issues in the game, but then I just deleted it because I don't think it's actually gonna change much to talk about it.

Copy... paste

[Lostdragon]

jakucha, on 24 June 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

Gauss rifles aren't the big issue though, as they have some big downsides being fragile and limited ammo, and fairly heavy. Heat isn't a temporary fix, it affects all the weapons people think of as OP.

If you make heat the limiting factor right now with the mechs we have then anything that can mount 2x Gauss and 1-2 PPCs becomes the best build. People use PPCs and AC40s because they do pinpoint damage and the heat they generate is easily manageable. If you restrict the firing of these by lowering the heat cap only then people just move on to builds that do the highest pinpoint alpha with the lowest heat and the GR becomes the new PPC.

Edit: Removed confrontational statement that didn't advance the discussion.

Edited by Lostdragon, 24 June 2013 - 10:46 AM.

[jakucha]

Lostdragon, on 24 June 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

I think you are burying your head in the sand. If you make heat the limiting factor right now with the mechs we have then anything that can mount 2x Gauss and 1-2 PPCs becomes the best build. People use PPCs and AC40s because they do pinpoint damage and the heat they generate is easily manageable. If you restrict the firing of these by lowering the heat cap only then people just move on to builds that do the highest pinpoint alpha with the lowest heat and the GR becomes the new PPC.

Gauss rifles are over 2 times as heavy as ppc, more-so combined with their ammo, explode, are quite fragile, and their projectiles are slower than PPC. I don't think they would suddenly become a huge problem. It also depends on how they go about modifying the heat system; perhaps staying near your heat threshold for too long will affect your ability to aim well.

Edited by jakucha, 24 June 2013 - 10:44 AM.

[Lostdragon]

jakucha, on 24 June 2013 - 10:43 AM, said:

Gauss rifles are over 2 times as heavy as ppc, more-so combined with their ammo, explode, are quite fragile, and their projectiles are slower than PPC. I don't think they would suddenly become a huge problem. It also depends on how they go about modifying the heat system; perhaps staying near your heat threshold for too long will affect your ability to aim well.

All the GR weight means is that Victor would be one of the best mechs. It could field 2 GR and an ERPPC no problem and still have a 40 point alpha without heat issues. You could build a CTF with 2x GR and a PPC that would be perfectly viable to replace current PPC boats. It would have to have like a XL 250-260 engine but if it had the biggest Alpha that wouldn't matter because it would still kick butt.

As long as it is possible to put 40+ points of damage to a single location in one shot people will run builds designed to do that.

[Troggy]

First of all. I'm not entirely sure the gloom and doom is in order. In one respect, PGI has been a little off their game lately, however they are a small studio busy building a game in a f2p model which allows unprecedented community feedback. Getting though all the noise is tough enough without melodrama.

However, I think the OP is right about weapons balance. These things do appear to be balanced from a bass-akwards approach. And, I think that a simpler, more comprehensive vision is needed. I think CPV has it right when he said this:

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 24 June 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

...we need to naturallly force pilots to space their weapons fire in link fire vs big pinpoint alphas, and the best way to do that is to cut the heatcap, increase dissapation, and make it so that firing more than 3 erppc puts you over 100% heat right away, crippling your mech with a shutdown and internal damage.

A million times this! A lower heat cap is far and away the solution to boating energy weapons. Make all HS have a heat capacity of 1, and give all doubles a dissipation of 2.0. I understand that at the time the decision was made, lights were ruling the world and the 3 sec Jenner F was something to fear. But, in the current game, that 3 second Jenner kills things about 50x slower than the 0.001 second 6PPC-Stalker or AC40 Jager. This would go a long way toward balancing heavy and light mechs considering the current heat dissipation.

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 24 June 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

mech3 had a great heat system, take away the coolant flush - a 12 MLaser blackhawk would simply nuke itself if shooting all 12 lasers. we need something similar here to allow for boating while giving boats disadvantages.

the choice should be 1. lots of heatsinks, less guns, very heat efficient, little to no heat problems, or tons of guns, big heat problems, but a few big shots and then you wait forever for cooldowns.

sadly with the current 2.0/1.4 DHS and the weak SHS we find ourselves in a problematic situation that always favours engine DHS + coolant + every gun you can squeeze. in mech3 if you only took 10-12 HS your mech wouldnt hardly dissipate heat, and that is in MWO a serious problem for creating a more balanced environment.

I don't think slow dissipation is really even needed. I think fast pace fire is fine. As long as the heat cap is low enough. A 3 or 4 PPC Stalker should be able to rock those things out there at a pretty steady rate...that's what it's build for. Just not 4 at a time.

--
Troggy

[8RoundsRapid]

Colonel Pada Vinson, on 24 June 2013 - 08:45 AM, said:

both mech3 and 4 had pinpoint convergence.

And both those games sucked because of it. Big time. Roland is right.

[Tom Sawyer]

I wonder about the lack of communication. Is PGI hard at work behind the scenes? They have to be aware of the flaws and public outcry. I understand ignoring the bitc*ing but ignoring the honest concerns? Disturbing and ominous.

[Roland]

8RoundsRapid, on 24 June 2013 - 11:22 AM, said:

And both those games sucked because of it. Big time. Roland is right.

Hey, don't get me wrong. I played the CRAP out of Mechwarrior 4.. played it in leagues for the better part of a decade. A ton of the folks here did.

When I said I don't really care that much if they deal with convergence, I mean it.. I am perfectly happy playing giant-alpha-warrior online. I honestly like that game.

But at the same time, I wouldn't mind if they made it more complex, with a convergence system.. I liked Chromehounds' system a lot.

The biggest thing though is that even though I don't mind playing the current meta, I am not so foolish as to deny the fundamental reasoning about WHY the game is like it is. That's where folks seem to fail to grasp what's going on.

The reason you have the current meta is because convergence is perfect. It's been like this throughout the entirety of beta (although for a while the steering-wheel underhive didn't realize it), and it's been like this throughout the entire of the mechwarrior franchise history.

This isn't something that is debatable. It's clearly established fact, evident from decades of gameplay. Pinpoint precision leads to a dominance of boats, duct-taping together as many weapons as possible to generate huge alphastrikes.

[General Taskeen]

Jman5, on 24 June 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

I don't see UAC/5 as a problem right now. AC/5s are 1 ton lighter and 1 slot lower.

You have not applied foresight to this sentence, therefore it is dismissible in a court of balance law.

[Jman5]

General Taskeen, on 24 June 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

You have not applied foresight to this sentence, therefore it is dismissible in a court of balance law.

[TOGSolid]

Quote

This isn't something that is debatable. It's clearly established fact, evident from decades of gameplay. Pinpoint precision leads to a dominance of boats, duct-taping together as many weapons as possible to generate huge alphastrikes.

I think this is part of what makes all of this so infuriating. PGI had two prior multiplayer Mechwarrior games that had very similar problems to go off of. From day one of starting production on this game they should have been asking themselves "how do we avoid repeating this clustefuck a third time?"

But no, instead they went in as if they had never played a Mechwarrior game before in their lives and look at where we're at. It's damn near MW4 all over again only without poptarting.

[El Bandito]

Troggy, on 24 June 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

A 3 or 4 PPC Stalker should be able to rock those things out there at a pretty steady rate...that's what it's build for. Just not 4 at a time. -- Troggy

No, Stalker arms are supposed to hold nothing bigger than Medium Lasers. Awesomes are supposed to boat PPCs.
Thanks to PGI neglecting hardpoint restrictions, we currently have Stalkers being the King of the Hill. Hill humping all day baby!

TOGSolid, on 24 June 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

I think this is part of what makes all of this so infuriating. PGI had two prior multiplayer Mechwarrior games that had very similar problems to go off of. From day one of starting production on this game they should have been asking themselves "how do we avoid repeating this clustefuck a third time?" But no, instead they went in as if they had never played a Mechwarrior game before in their lives and look at where we're at. It's damn near MW4 all over again only without poptarting.

Many of the devs probably never played any previous MW titles.

[TOGSolid]

Quote

Thanks to PGI neglecting hardpoint restrictions, we currently have Stalkers being the King of the Hill. Hill humping all day baby!

Agreed times a thousand. Hardpoint restrictions would have fixed a lot of problems and made the game a lot more diverse.

[Roland]

TOGSolid, on 24 June 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

I think this is part of what makes all of this so infuriating. PGI had two prior multiplayer Mechwarrior games that had very similar problems to go off of. From day one of starting production on this game they should have been asking themselves "how do we avoid repeating this clustefuck a third time?"

But no, instead they went in as if they had never played a Mechwarrior game before in their lives and look at where we're at. It's damn near MW4 all over again only without poptarting.

I think you are being unfair to PGI.

PGI most definitely DID make moves to address prior mechwarrior issues. The Laser DOT effect is a direct result of this, and in many ways, achieved exactly what they set out to do.

In MW4, lasers were instant hit weapons that did all their damage at once. Given the terribad netcode of the day, this made lasers infinitely better than traveltime weapons. Thus, they constituted around 85% of the weapons used in league play.

PGI realized this, and implemented the burn time effect on lasers, and this was a great solution that I think PGI doesn't get enough credit for. This was very effective in achieving exactly the kind of damage spread that helps balance things out.

Although this in itself was only a partial solution that missed some other key aspects of balance stemming from convergence. For instance, while it spreads out damage and prevents dumping everything onto a single panel easilly, it doesn't really help with the fact that a ton of medium lasers ends up being better than a single large laser in many cases.

It's similar to how MW4 balance was conceived.... FASA noted the biggest issue with MW3, which was that you made gun-bags full of light energy weapons, and created super lasers from them. To try and fix that, they nerfed the crap out of the light energy weapons... but, as is to be expected, all this did was force everyone to boat LARGE lasers, instead of medium lasers.

What's funny is that this aspect of balancing was actually repeated in MWO already, where they nerfed medium and small lasers somewhat, and buffed the large lasers to try and deal with this, when in reality that reason that the smaller energy weapons were so great compared to the heavy ones was that with perfect convergence, duct-taping a bunch of light energy weapons together effectively gives you a heavy energy weapon, but one which is much easier to field.

Then, once HSR was implemented, we saw many mechs switch over to the heavy hitting PPC... which may lead some folks to say, "Well, why is that? You just said that convergence benefitted smaller weapons!" And that is totally true, but the reason why PPC's became dominant is because they do damage in a single burst. There is no burn time, which makes them easier to dump damage on a single panel. Thus, in many cases, they are superior to lasers when it comes to killing mechs.


All of this boils down to a single unwavering rule of mechwarrior, which I will sum up here:
Mechwarrior is about who can do enough damage to a single kill location to destroy it, as fast as possible.

This is all that matters in mechwarrior. If, at any time, you think that this is not the case... that DPS means something, that some complex strategy is at the core of building mechs, etc.... you are wrong.

Mechwarrior has always been about, and always will be about, being able to punch through a mech and destroy its engine or cockpit. That is all. Doing this as fast as possible is how you win.

And that means high alpha strikes will rule the field, as long as that entire alpha strike hits a single location. That configuration will give your target the minimal chance to thwart your attempts to kill his mech. It will mean that you need to score the minimum number of hits to kill him (you only need to land ONE hit to kill a mech if you are doing more than 36 damage).

Until folks recognize this singular rule to mechwarrior, and why it is true, then folks aren't gonna really understand the underlying balance issues. They will continue to dance around the issue and try to patch on little temporary fixes that fail to address the real problem.

[TOGSolid]

Quote

I think you are being unfair to PGI.

I'm really not because:

Quote

Mechwarrior is about who can do enough damage to a single kill location to destroy it, as fast as possible.

This has been apparent since forever. People build whatever they can that accomplishes this objective as reliably and quickly as possible. Until this blatantly obvious, underlying issue is resolved it will undermine any and all attempts to create a quality Mechwarrior game.

Edited by TOGSolid, 24 June 2013 - 12:38 PM.

[stjobe]

Roland, on 24 June 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

In MW4, lasers were instant hit weapons that did all their damage at once. Given the terribad netcode of the day, this made lasers infinitely better than traveltime weapons. Thus, they constituted around 85% of the weapons used in league play.

PGI realized this, and implemented the burn time effect on lasers, and this was a great solution that I think PGI doesn't get enough credit for. This was very effective in achieving exactly the kind of damage spread that helps balance things out.

So here's a radical idea*: Why not do the same with ballistics?

Make all of them burst-fire three to five rounds over say a second, then cool down. Pin-point alpha strikes GONE!

If a 3xPPC, 1xGR alpha is just 10-11 instant damage, with the rest coming in 3-4 more bursts over a second, the target has the same chance to react as it has versus energy weapons.

*not really radical, not really new - I personally have suggested the idea several times on these forums, and so have many others.

[Lostdragon]

Roland, on 24 June 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

I think you are being unfair to PGI.

PGI most definitely DID make moves to address prior mechwarrior issues. The Laser DOT effect is a direct result of this, and in many ways, achieved exactly what they set out to do.

In MW4, lasers were instant hit weapons that did all their damage at once. Given the terribad netcode of the day, this made lasers infinitely better than traveltime weapons. Thus, they constituted around 85% of the weapons used in league play.

PGI realized this, and implemented the burn time effect on lasers, and this was a great solution that I think PGI doesn't get enough credit for. This was very effective in achieving exactly the kind of damage spread that helps balance things out.

Although this in itself was only a partial solution that missed some other key aspects of balance stemming from convergence. For instance, while it spreads out damage and prevents dumping everything onto a single panel easilly, it doesn't really help with the fact that a ton of medium lasers ends up being better than a single large laser in many cases.

It's similar to how MW4 balance was conceived.... FASA noted the biggest issue with MW3, which was that you made gun-bags full of light energy weapons, and created super lasers from them. To try and fix that, they nerfed the crap out of the light energy weapons... but, as is to be expected, all this did was force everyone to boat LARGE lasers, instead of medium lasers.

What's funny is that this aspect of balancing was actually repeated in MWO already, where they nerfed medium and small lasers somewhat, and buffed the large lasers to try and deal with this, when in reality that reason that the smaller energy weapons were so great compared to the heavy ones was that with perfect convergence, duct-taping a bunch of light energy weapons together effectively gives you a heavy energy weapon, but one which is much easier to field.

Then, once HSR was implemented, we saw many mechs switch over to the heavy hitting PPC... which may lead some folks to say, "Well, why is that? You just said that convergence benefitted smaller weapons!" And that is totally true, but the reason why PPC's became dominant is because they do damage in a single burst. There is no burn time, which makes them easier to dump damage on a single panel. Thus, in many cases, they are superior to lasers when it comes to killing mechs.


All of this boils down to a single unwavering rule of mechwarrior, which I will sum up here:
Mechwarrior is about who can do enough damage to a single kill location to destroy it, as fast as possible.

This is all that matters in mechwarrior. If, at any time, you think that this is not the case... that DPS means something, that some complex strategy is at the core of building mechs, etc.... you are wrong.

Mechwarrior has always been about, and always will be about, being able to punch through a mech and destroy its engine or cockpit. That is all. Doing this as fast as possible is how you win.

And that means high alpha strikes will rule the field, as long as that entire alpha strike hits a single location. That configuration will give your target the minimal chance to thwart your attempts to kill his mech. It will mean that you need to score the minimum number of hits to kill him (you only need to land ONE hit to kill a mech if you are doing more than 36 damage).

Until folks recognize this singular rule to mechwarrior, and why it is true, then folks aren't gonna really understand the underlying balance issues. They will continue to dance around the issue and try to patch on little temporary fixes that fail to address the real problem.

Very succinct and accurate analysis. This is why their plan to nerf boating via heat penalties and why any heat penalty alone is not enough to stop high damage alpha builds. You can make a 40 point alpha CTF right now with two GR and an ERPPC that has 53% heat efficiency. It is not fast, but if PPC STKs are reduced to chainfiring for DPS builds like that will become the next thing people complain about, especially with the Victor incoming and the potential to have a 3x GR mech one day.

[El Bandito]

stjobe, on 24 June 2013 - 12:42 PM, said:

So here's a radical idea*: Why not do the same with ballistics? Make all of them burst-fire three to five rounds over say a second, then cool down. Pin-point alpha strikes GONE! If a 3xPPC, 1xGR alpha is just 10-11 instant damage, with the rest coming in 3-4 more bursts over a second, the target has the same chance to react as it has versus energy weapons. *not really radical, not really new - I personally have suggested the idea several times on these forums, and so have many others.

For Autocannons and PPCs that is workable since they worked in bursts and streams in lore, instead of one big shot. Gauss though, always functioned like one giant punch in the face. Dunno, how they can go around that. Perhaps adding power limiter on firing multiple Gauss together? That thing draws huge amounts of power to fire.

Edited by El Bandito, 24 June 2013 - 12:47 PM.