197 replies to this topic

[Adridos]

Sug, on 28 June 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

I know it's completely impossible unless I win the lotto and buy PGI but removing customization would be great.

Not removing customisation completely (that could only work as a separte game mode/option), but at least restrict it to sane levels.

[Dude42]

I still say boating is far less of a concern than pinpoint alpha strikes. You could boat your *** off in TT, you could not force all your boated weapons to hit the same armor panel, every time, in one shot.

[Praehotec8]

Bishop Steiner, on 28 June 2013 - 12:48 PM, said:

There are always tradeoffs. Those large guns are heavier, but with pinpoint convergence, focused damage and range, usually worth it. As stated, Hard Points are just one of several things needed to be addressed. BUt for some mechs, trading the ability to carry 6 Medium Pulse lasers, to instead use 2 ER PPC (assuming 3 slots per torso like the BLR-1G, or Jenner-Ks arms) might not be worth it... especially when the meta is no longer 6 ppc stalkers. I know when fightling lights, I sure prefer multiple small weapons for quick cycle shot times to compensate for potential misses. I can and have killed lights with 2 AC/20 or PPC, but it sure the heck is a chore compared to nailing them with multiple mediums and streaks (not to mention hard to avoid overheating or burning thru ammo that I end up wishing i had later).

That said, unlike some of our "betters"on here, I don't proclaim Hard Points as the one true fix. Just part of a bigger puzzle needed to fix and improve this game.

All very true. Out of curiosity, how would you align the hardpoints on the Stalker 3F for example? I'm assuming that the torso hardpoints are the large ones because it appears that's where they are default? My concern is that 4 PPC stalkers would be unchanged as they would just take the 4 ML slots and make them 2 PPCs as usual (would get rid of the 6 PPC stalker, but I think the 4 PPC one is worse as 6 PPCs cause so much heat it's almost a joke). I recognize that hardpoints aren't a magic fix-all, but I wonder what can be added in addition to fix the current meta-game.

[Sug]

Adridos, on 28 June 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

Not removing customization completely (that could only work as a separate game mode/option), but at least restrict it to sane levels.

If you:

Fight for a House: No customization but you don't pay for ammo and repairs.

Fight for a Merc Unit: Limited customization based on hardpoint size. It's costly. Ammo and repairs are paid by the Unit.

Lone Wolf: Customization based on hardpoint type (like it is now). But it's expensive as **** and you pay for all your R&R.

[Bishop Steiner]

also since Light Gauss are 5 crits each (and MWO does use crit spaces WITH Hard Points, whereas MW4 was purely hardpoints) there go 25 crit slots, including 10 in one location, minimum (since a torso has to mount at least 2 t0 get 5, and the Daishi only has 9 arm crit slots), out of a potential 44 crits? To free up the weight for that extra 9.5 tons requires endo (already uses XL) for another 7, +4 for the XL..... up to 36... wait...only freed up 5 tons with Endo, so need Ferro too..... hmmm another 7 crits....... for 43..... so lose 5 tons of armor to free up room for the 5 LGR.... and I can now fit.... 1 ton of ammo?

Helps to compare apples to apples, don't it?

[hammerreborn]

Bishop Steiner, on 28 June 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

so you had a mech with 60 tons of Gauss rifles, (doing an MWO equivalent of 45 pt) meaing you had either no engine, no armor, or no ammo, or minimals of all the above.

congrats.

of course, since omnis to be done remotely intelligently should not be able to modify structure, armor engines or base heatsinks (the weapons loadout pods are omni, not the chassis, and warriors don't wown and can't refit the whol emech in the Clans)

you have 50.5 tons to work with..... still scary but 9.5 short to mount 5 of Any type of gauss.... let alone ammo. Am guessing this was Mekteks broken excuse for MW4?

No, I only used it in UA matches, of course. And like I said, there was no armor, no engine, or anything else really. Just one giant alpha of pain.

Yes, we don't have that in this game. But the point still stands that hardpoints make every single IS mech obsolete when the clans roll in and have Omnislots.

Edited by hammerreborn, 28 June 2013 - 01:06 PM.

[Odanan]

sj mausgmr, on 28 June 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

Hardpoint sizes is without a doubt, the best solution.

True balanced weapons (and heat) would be the solution.

That said, I kind of like the hardpoint sizing. I would make it a little different, tough:

Small Ballistic Hardpoint: machinegun, AC/2, AC/5, UAC/5
Large Ballistic Hardpoint: LBX/10, AC/10, AC/20

Small Energy Hardpoint: TAG, small laser, small pulse laser, flamer, medium laser, medium pulse laser
Large Energy Hardpoint: large laser, ER large laser, large pulse laser, PPC, ER PPC

Small Missile Hardpoint: NARC, SRM2, SSRM2, SRM4, LRM5
Large Missile Hardpoint: SRM6, LRM10, LRM15, LRM20

Let's look at the Catapult K-2:
LA 1leh
LT 1seh, 1sbh
CT
H
RT 1seh, 1sbh
RA 1leh

So, you can mount small autocannons in the K2, but not large ones - keeping the "character" of the variant.

[Bishop Steiner]

Praehotec8, on 28 June 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

All very true. Out of curiosity, how would you align the hardpoints on the Stalker 3F for example? I'm assuming that the torso hardpoints are the large ones because it appears that's where they are default? My concern is that 4 PPC stalkers would be unchanged as they would just take the 4 ML slots and make them 2 PPCs as usual (would get rid of the 6 PPC stalker, but I think the 4 PPC one is worse as 6 PPCs cause so much heat it's almost a joke). I recognize that hardpoints aren't a magic fix-all, but I wonder what can be added in addition to fix the current meta-game.

it would still have the ability, which is why I offer that as an optional idea... it ain't perfect. Although it is intended to be working in line with fixes to things like convergence, so at least if one did that, the 2 Torso PPC would not line up with the arm ones automatically, nor would it have 2 per arm for convergence and hill humping.

Plus they would still be poorly armed for dealing with in your face fighting. Which if we can reduce the instadeath to onslaughts of 6ppcs, I think more people would be willing to try to close and fight these monsters.

Adding that, plus the needed convergence fix and their planned heat "fix"would go a long way to improving the meta and returning the concept of "roles"to the game.

hammerreborn, on 28 June 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

No, I only used it in UA matches, of course. And like I said, there was no armor, no engine, or anything else really. Just one giant alpha of pain.

Yes, we don't have that in this game. But the point still stands that hardpoints make every single IS mech obsolete when the clans roll in and have Omnislots.

and they are supposed to be that way.

Othewise.. we all are driving Omni mechs.

The advantage IS forces are supposed to have is numerical superiority. Not ****** the Meta, which I am pretty sure is never really part of the game plan.

[Sug]

hammerreborn, on 28 June 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

But the point still stands that hardpoints make every single IS mech obsolete when the clans roll in and have Omnislots.

Meh. We decide how we want to play, pick out a mech with hardpoints that fit our style, and add the weapons we want.

It's pretty "omni" right now.

[Odanan]

Dude42, on 28 June 2013 - 12:59 PM, said:

I still say boating is far less of a concern than pinpoint alpha strikes. You could boat your *** off in TT, you could not force all your boated weapons to hit the same armor panel, every time, in one shot.

So, remove the group fire of MWO.

[Bishop Steiner]

Odanan, on 28 June 2013 - 01:08 PM, said:

True balanced weapons (and heat) would be the solution.

That said, I kind of like the hardpoint sizing. I would make it a little different, tough:

Small Ballistic Hardpoint: machinegun, AC/2, AC/5, UAC/5
Large Ballistic Hardpoint: LBX/10, AC/10, AC/20

Small Energy Hardpoint: TAG, small laser, small pulse laser, flamer, medium laser, medium pulse laser
Large Energy Hardpoint: large laser, ER large laser, large pulse laser, PPC, ER PPC

Small Missile Hardpoint: NARC, SRM2, SSRM2, SRM4, LRM5
Large Missile Hardpoint: SRM6, LRM10, LRM15, LRM20

Let's look at the Catapult K-2:
LA 1leh
LT 1seh, 1sbh
CT
H
RT 1seh, 1sbh
RA 1leh

So, you can mount small autocannons in the K2, but not large ones - keeping the "character" of the variant.

aside from the LRM 10 (which I could see go either way, but it is already a red headed stepchild in the LRM family so thought it could use some love, plus I like mechs like the Valkyrie and Quickdraw using small missile hardpoints. But would not cry if it were a large one), that was largely the gist of my post. I added "support"as an optional idea (which I still like, but admit it might muddy things too much, just makes more sense to swap a machine gun out for an AMS (like the 3050 TRO Warhammer did) than for an AC2, to me.

[Funky Bacon]

Well... that was an easy fix to prevent a 6-7x PPC boating BLR that still allow a lot of customization.

[3rdworld]

I am just glad I don't have to play the game you guys want.

Funky Bacon, on 28 June 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

Well... that was an easy fix to prevent a 6-7x PPC boating BLR that still allow a lot of customization.

Explain why you limit the energy so much, but allow machine guns to take up the entire arm. This isn't a personal vendetta against ppcs is it?

[Rovertoo]

I'm not a fan of sized hard points or Random convergence (Though I do think that torso mounts and arm mounts lacking an actuator should just fire straight) because they limit my freedom to dork around in the mechlab. Well, not the convergence bit, I wouldn't see that as a balancing mechanic but more of an annoyance. (Why does my sniper weapon veer off to the side when I shoot it? That would just be annoying and make me feel cheated. Perhaps it's just me. But I'm glad they stayed away from that.) But sized hard points just seem to be a way to make the mechlab less fun. I love dropping every point of armor and engine rating I can to cram a few ridiculous big guns in my light mech, or seeing what more 'serious' changes I can make, such as what happens when I try a dual large laser mech instead of an UAC/5 mech or something. What I'm trying to say is that sized hardpoints, I think, would create more problems than they would solve. I believe there are less drastic ways to change this 'meta'. Not too long ago nobody ever used PPCs.
Personally, I'm a subscriber to the 'lower heat cap' balancing technique (though it is somewhat drastic) with a greatly reduced heat cap balanced by a greatly increased heat dissapation, to make high heat or large alpha strikes really dangerous, but just as rewarding.

Also, big fan of your artwork!

[hammerreborn]

Funky Bacon, on 28 June 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

Well... that was an easy fix to prevent a 6-7x PPC boating BLR that still allow a lot of customization.

Know what's also an easy fix that doesn't require rewriting the whole game and each mechs loadout potential? Lowering the heat cap so that 4 ERPPCs causes a shutdown no matter what. Then you don't even have to worry about 7 being boated.

Sug, on 28 June 2013 - 01:12 PM, said:

Meh. We decide how we want to play, pick out a mech with hardpoints that fit our style, and add the weapons we want.

It's pretty "omni" right now.

Is this a bad thing? Frankly, I prefer to be in my Jenner, or an Awesome, or probably the shadowhawk from the looks of it. But if clan mechs are just flat out better, then...whats the point of any of this? If you're going to argue, well, clans are better and we'll all switch to them anyways....why bother making hardpoint limits in the first place other than to have a temporary fix for the next 6-10 months that will completely blow the hell apart once the first omnimech strolls in 6 ppcs a blazing and we're RIGHT BACK TO WHERE WE ARE NOW.

In fact, with the way clan double heat sinks work and clan ERPPCs which have less weight, clan omnimechs will be able to fire them even more as you can fit more doubles which once again raises their heat caps tremendously, making the problem EVEN WORSE.

Edited by hammerreborn, 28 June 2013 - 01:30 PM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Quote

True balanced weapons (and heat) would be the solution.

That said, I kind of like the hardpoint sizing. I would make it a little different, tough:

Small Ballistic Hardpoint: machinegun, AC/2, AC/5, UAC/5
Large Ballistic Hardpoint: LBX/10, AC/10, AC/20

Small Energy Hardpoint: TAG, small laser, small pulse laser, flamer, medium laser, medium pulse laser
Large Energy Hardpoint: large laser, ER large laser, large pulse laser, PPC, ER PPC

Small Missile Hardpoint: NARC, SRM2, SSRM2, SRM4, LRM5
Large Missile Hardpoint: SRM6, LRM10, LRM15, LRM20

Let's look at the Catapult K-2:
LA 1leh
LT 1seh, 1sbh
CT
H
RT 1seh, 1sbh
RA 1leh

So, you can mount small autocannons in the K2, but not large ones - keeping the "character" of the variant.

Part of the fun is coming up with your own builds, take that away and you take away alot of the popularity of the game. Also if you aren't careful changing the hardpoints work you would totally lose alot of players. For example I love the Quickdraw but if you told me I couldn't mount an ER PPC in the arm because it traditionally had medium lasers there and thus was limited to a small energy weapon, I would quit this game in a heartbeat.

Also you talk about "True Balanced Weapns" well the only way to do that is to have every weapon weight 10 tons, take up 10 crits, produce 10 heat and do 10 damage otherwise your always going to have something that works better in one condition or another.

Lastly, why am I the only one that doesn't seem to have a problem with all these Quad PPC builds? Am I just so damn good that even they can't touch me? Personally I think not hehe. In over 200 matches over the last week or so, I have only died like 3-5 times to someone obviously targeting me with a PPC boat. That is roughly what....2.5% of the matches I have played?

Now I am sure I got pegged with a Quad PPC more often than that but if it happened, I was already damaged and probably a single PPC would have done the trick. The point however is that it happens to me so rarely that I hardly notice and I for the life of me can't understand how my experience could be so different than others experiences.

[Nathan Foxbane]

I say we wait and see if the current meta is still the dominant by the start of September. If it is, then we can start to worry.

[Dude42]

Viktor Drake, on 28 June 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

Lastly, why am I the only one that doesn't seem to have a problem with all these Quad PPC builds? Am I just so damn good that even they can't touch me? Personally I think not hehe. In over 200 matches over the last week or so, I have only died like 3-5 times to someone obviously targeting me with a PPC boat. That is roughly what....2.5% of the matches I have played?

Now I am sure I got pegged with a Quad PPC more often than that but if it happened, I was already damaged and probably a single PPC would have done the trick. The point however is that it happens to me so rarely that I hardly notice and I for the life of me can't understand how my experience could be so different than others experiences.

It's because you're playing in the "kiddie pool", the lower end of the ELO spectrum. What happens is that people using the 4 (ER)PPC+Gauss builds rise to the top of the ELO pool very quickly, unless they absolutely cannot aim at all(which explains why the ones you see don't kill you very often...). People playing at near my level know what I'm talking about when I say that nearly every match has at least 4-6 4(ER)PPC+Gauss boats, some of whom can aim quite well.

[Tarball]

I'm kind of split on this whole argument. I like the idea of hard point limitations but I think a weapon convergence fix might be simpler. Let me illustrate.

I was in a match on forest colony starting near the water in my Atlas RS. I was running 4 large lasers and one AC10. Had the lasers set up in two weapon groups with the AC10 in the third. After a minute the enemy team engaged us and i found myself in a one on one fight against a highlander. He had 3ppc 1 gauss build. I saw him first and opened up with my large lasers in two salvos and firing my AC10. Now, i'm not that great and struggle sometimes to keep my damage on the same hitbox while moving. So i was hitting across center and left torso. He turned and shot me once in right torso, Turned away and turned back shot me again after cool down and blew off my right torso. I kind of stood there thinking, "Well, there goes 3/5th's my weapons in a few seconds." While great for him it just seemed kinda cheesy.

Could i boat 4 ppcs and do the same thing in my Atlas? Yep. Is it fun? Not for me. Makes the game and fights feel less rewarding and almost like playing a game and using a cheat code. Fun for a few rounds then it feels boring.

This illustrates what the true problem is. The pinpoint convergence of projectile weapons weapon systems into one zone seems to be what's causing the problem.

On the other hand I do see the rationale with the hard-point restriction argument. Its like taking and M1A1 Abrams tank


And replacing the the two machine guns on the top turret with two more turrets the size of the main gun turret just because it has 3 "ballistic hard-points" so to speak. Seems a bit silly for a simulation type game.

[Finn McShae]

Dude42, on 28 June 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

It's because you're playing in the "kiddie pool", the lower end of the ELO spectrum. What happens is that people using the 4 (ER)PPC+Gauss builds rise to the top of the ELO pool very quickly, unless they absolutely cannot aim at all(which explains why the ones you see don't kill you very often...). People playing at near my level know what I'm talking about when I say that nearly every match has at least 4-6 4(ER)PPC+Gauss boats, some of whom can aim quite well.

If this is true, I'm glad my "Bad" builds and constantly playing drunk have kept me in the "kiddie pool" area. Much more fun down there.