721 replies to this topic

[DarkJaguar]

Teralitha, on 10 July 2013 - 07:26 AM, said:

And who wrote that? No mechwarrior title has ever made autocannons like machine guns, you know why? Because whoever wrote that is wrong. Not even TT was played like that. That posting from sarna is rubbish. You cant believe everything you read on the internet.

The entire MW2 family? MW3 fired autocannons in Bursts. Actually, I seem to recall MW4 doing it that way as well...

That posting on Sarna is from the Battletech TECHmanual, go pick up one of the Battletech novels as well, any of them, and read it. Autocannons are always decribed in canon as firing very rapidly.

[Teralitha]

stjobe, on 10 July 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

As I said, the text is lifted from the TechManual. And I just edited in a passage from Decision at Thunder Rift you may enjoy reading.

Or not, since it conclusively proves you're wrong.

lol no it doesnt. It was written by someone expressing their view on it. Its not written by God. Their view just happens to be false. Sorry.....

[Mister Blastman]

Further, on 10 July 2013 - 06:47 AM, said:

Please stop. Everyone must have listened to Little Einsteins when they were kids because they are all over thinking this.

Raise PPC heat to 13-14. the lowering in heat is what caused the boating problem in the first place, it would make sense to just reverse it (to a lesser degree) to a middle ground number and go from there. No other weapon is suffering from this problem so I REALLY don't understand these suggestions that effect everythign. Get a job.

Complexity in game play will cause noobs to be crushed even more and drive away casual gamers.

Stop wasting your time, the simplest solution is most often the correct solution. Raise PPC heat.

Putting a system of convergence into MWO is NOT complex. Making it based off of heat, or giving us true heat penalties is NOT complex.

I present to you complex:


And this:



Please, don't EVER use the word complex to describe MWO again or anything they could put into the game. For the record I fly both of the above sims frequently and the complexity become second nature after a while.

[Teralitha]

DarkJaguar, on 10 July 2013 - 07:34 AM, said:

The entire MW2 family? MW3 fired autocannons in Bursts. Actually, I seem to recall MW4 doing it that way as well...

That posting on Sarna is from the Battletech TECHmanual, go pick up one of the Battletech novels as well, any of them, and read it. Autocannons are always decribed in canon as firing very rapidly.

no, MW4 did not have burst fired autocannons. Your probably thinking of the ultra ac2's which had a very short recycle time.

[B0oN]

Teralitha, on 10 July 2013 - 07:26 AM, said:

And who wrote that? No mechwarrior title has ever made autocannons like machine guns, you know why? Because whoever wrote that is wrong. Not even TT was played like that. That posting from sarna is rubbish. You cant believe everything you read on the internet.

Have you ever read some of the books where exactly the burst fire mechanic of AC´s was being mentioned and where mechwarriors in the heat of battle/due to targeting computer´s miscalculation/due to just being overheated missed precious shots out of their bursts that cost them said battles or saved other warriors lifes due to not fully hitting with the full burst ?
And Sarna is a very, very reliable go-to source for solid info, not your average interwebs information.

Plus what Mr.Blastman said :
Complexity looks different !

Edited by Rad Hanzo, 10 July 2013 - 07:44 AM.

[Lord of All]

I believe you have nailed all the balance issues that need to be addressed. If they are indeed addressed then continually adjusting weapons will not be goto for ever balance issue. Which is as it should be, Every time a new chassis is introduced it just exasperates the issue with this balance. If the core issues that you have outlined are addressed then adding chassis will not unbalance the game and make older chassis m00t.

Here is my idea on Convergence. I believe it would be easily implemented and could be a part of the balance puzzle. Please read the thread before cherry picking arguments.

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

[Teralitha]

DarkJaguar, on 10 July 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

From a purely "game-play" view, I would disagree. Rapid firing weapons are far more exciting, especially for new players who can now justify the 14 ton weight of the AC20 if for no other reason than "Because it's cool!". I know I used to take Machine guns from time to time back before they were buffed, simply because I liked the way they fired.

I think you would find out in practice that this would be false. Players are gonna shoot their 14 ton weapon, expecting a big boom and massive damage and will be disappointed, say its crap and then come to forums to complain how the weapon is weak and useless for 14 tons.

This a perfect example of a suggestion while seeming good on paper, will be very bad in practice. Im sorry, but no.

It seems your only issue is sound effects.

Edited by Teralitha, 10 July 2013 - 07:50 AM.

[FireSlade]

Here is the thing MWO basically spits in the face of realism but they still have to add some physics in or the mechs would be flying around the maps instead of running. One basic physics law MWO should use and so far has not is Newton's Third Law of physics. The AC20 is the biggest offender in this with the 203mm bore size and launching a 280+ LB sized round (think how powerful a .50 cal gun is and those bullets weigh about a pound). Heck that video of a battleship firing off its cannons (if you truly saw it) would have shown them firing the main guns one at a time. Why? Because if they fired every cannon onboard the ship would capsize from the forces involved and that is with a ship weighing 45,000 tons, 450 times heavier that the biggest assault mech. If an AC20 can knock a mech on its *** then 2 on a 65ton mech should keep the Jagermech on its *** with everyshot. If firing multiple shots making it harder for some random player to remove all armor on a heavy mech with just one shot then I think that is a fair compromise between physics and balance.

[stjobe]

Teralitha, on 10 July 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

lol no it doesnt. It was written by someone expressing their view on it. Its not written by God. Their view just happens to be false. Sorry.....

Come on, now you're just covering your ears, going "la la la can't hear you".

Decision at Thunder Rift is as canon as the TT rules. The TT rules, by the way, that are defined in the TechManual which the sarna.net quote was lifted from.

Just give it up, admit you were wrong about the ACs, and move on. Continue your crusade to save us from the evil Double Heat Sinks or something, but on this issue, you're wrong.

Plain and simple.

[Warge]

Teralitha, on 10 July 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

Not alot of people are going to want what you want.

S..t happens.

Teralitha, on 10 July 2013 - 07:23 AM, said:

And even if they did that, you would probably not like it once you tried it.

Still I think it's better than AC40 Jaggers roaming the map and makilng 1 shot kills.

[DarkJaguar]

Teralitha, on 10 July 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

no, MW4 did not have burst fired autocannons. Your probably thinking of the ultra ac2's which had a very short recycle time.

Mechwarrior 4 Autocannon
Mechwarrior 3 Autocannon
Mechwarrior 2 Autocannon

Are you sure? Looks burst fire to me, as the enemy shooting at the camera is firing an autocannon, and it is decidedly not an AC2.

[stjobe]

Warge, on 10 July 2013 - 07:49 AM, said:

Still I think it's better than AC40 Jaggers roaming the map and makilng 1 shot kills.

I wrote this back on page 7 saying much the same thing, as an answer to someone asking incredulously if I wanted it to take 2 minutes to kill a 'mech:

stjobe, on 04 July 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

Sure, why not? It's a damn sight better than getting one-shotted, and also very much true to just about every depiction of 'mech battles in the BattleTech universe - lumbering steel behemoths slugging it out, slowly chipping away at each other, with pilots nearly suffocating in the baking-oven heat of their cockpits, their machine falling apart around them but heroically getting that epic final shot off that ensures their victory - and afterwards limping home to be repaired, often times with parts from the very 'mech they just defeated.

That's BattleTech. Getting one-shotted by a multi-PPC+Gauss sniper is not.

'Mechs firing 6 PPCs at once without shutting down isn't BattleTech, and neither is a whole alpha of different weapons hitting the exact same point of the target. Those parts of MWO needs to go.

Edited by stjobe, 10 July 2013 - 07:58 AM.

[JokerVictor]

Teralitha, on 10 July 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

Despite that opinion from where ever it was posted, in the TT game it was a single round to a single location. Thats how the game was played. OR did u roll the dice 20 times to see where each round hit? Yeah.... I thought so.

Your idea of an autocannon -


While the AC20 is actually more like....


Which do you really prefer?

Actually, it's more like this.



Or this.



But the whole point of having a bunch of different manufacturers and models is that you get to choose which one you prefer. You still want the big single punch with long cool down? Alrighty, it's still there.

I'd personally prefer the rapid-fire version, because to get a similar effect from the lighter AC's you need to invest just ridiculous amounts of tonnage. And why do I need 700-800m range for rapid-fire when I want to brawl?

[DarkJaguar]

Teralitha, on 10 July 2013 - 07:44 AM, said:

I think you would find out in practice that this would be false. Players are gonna shoot their 14 ton weapon, expecting a big boom and massive damage and will be disappointed, say its crap and then come to forums to complain how the weapon is weak and useless for 14 tons.

This a perfect example of a suggestion while seeming good on paper, will be very bad in practice. Im sorry, but no.

It seems your only issue is sound effects.

If the AC20 is the only weapon fixed then sure, I'd agree with you, however because this discussion is based around rebalancing EVERYTHING, let me point out how you're wrong.

You say people wouldn't take a burst fire or high R.O.F. AC20 because it wouldn't be doing damage? It's still doing the highest DPS in game. With normalized armor, heat, and ammo values a player would find either of these options very appealing as you could watch your opponents armor melt away in real time. with normalized armor values 2 damage to a single location is actually significant, now 10 of those is even more so, if a skilled pilot is able to hold an AC20 burst on target and hit nothing but the center torso of a heavy mech, that's 2/3 of the armor gone in 10 seconds. That would be hella cool to see.

Edited by DarkJaguar, 10 July 2013 - 08:02 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

DarkJaguar, on 10 July 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:

Mechwarrior 4 Autocannon
Mechwarrior 3 Autocannon
Mechwarrior 2 Autocannon

Are you sure? Looks burst fire to me, as the enemy shooting at the camera is firing an autocannon, and it is decidedly not an AC2.

The problem with Mechwarrior 4 was that even though the ACs streamed in it, the game was a broken piece of crap because only the very first shell had to connect for them all to count as damage. Also, if you ridge humped with large lasers, all you'd have to do is hit at the very first second of firing--if you backed behind the hill while mid beam, the beam would go through the hill still doing full damage to the enemy.

Mechwarrior 4 was an abomination. Mechwarrior 3... oh how I wish Betty's voice was sexy like in the almighty, hallowed Mechwarrior 2.

[DarkJaguar]

Mister Blastman, on 10 July 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

The problem with Mechwarrior 4 was that even though the ACs streamed in it, the game was a broken piece of crap because only the very first shell had to connect for them all to count as damage. Also, if you ridge humped with large lasers, all you'd have to do is hit at the very first second of firing--if you backed behind the hill while mid beam, the beam would go through the hill still doing full damage to the enemy.

Mechwarrior 4 was an abomination. Mechwarrior 3... oh how I wish Betty's voice was sexy like in the almighty, hallowed Mechwarrior 2.

I didn't say they worked, I simply wished to illustrate to the post I was responding to that in fact, EVERY Mechwarrior Video game has used a rapid-fire or burst fire mechanic for the autocannon EXCEPT MW:O

Edited by DarkJaguar, 10 July 2013 - 08:05 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

Living Legends has a combination for their ACs. The AC 20 and AC 10 are single shot like we have in MWO. The AC 5 and AC 2 are more rapid fire and then... then they have those glorious RACs.

Oh, and shameless plug:

http://mwomercs.com/...t-phoenix-down/

Join us ALL in Mechwarrior Living Legends, this weekend, all weekend long. It is free to download/install and no purchase of Crysis Warhead is needed. One click install. See thread for details.

[DarkJaguar]

Mister Blastman, on 10 July 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

Living Legends has a combination for their ACs. The AC 20 and AC 10 are single shot like we have in MWO. The AC 5 and AC 2 are more rapid fire and then... then they have those glorious RACs.

Oh, and shameless plug:

http://mwomercs.com/...t-phoenix-down/

Join us ALL in Mechwarrior Living Legends, this weekend, all weekend long. It is free to download/install and no purchase of Crysis Warhead is needed. One click install. See thread for details.

I'll have to pop in and say hi. Living Legends was a lot of fun.

[RG Notch]

DarkJaguar, on 10 July 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

If the AC20 is the only weapon fixed then sure, I'd agree with you, however because this discussion is based around rebalancing EVERYTHING, let me point out how you're wrong.

You say people wouldn't take a burst fire or high R.O.F. AC20 because it wouldn't be doing damage? It's still doing the highest DPS in game. With normalized armor, heat, and ammo values a player would find either of these options very appealing as you could watch your opponents armor melt away in real time. with normalized armor values 2 damage to a single location is actually significant, now 10 of those is even more so, if a skilled pilot is able to hold an AC20 burst on target and hit nothing but the center torso of a heavy mech, that's 2/3 of the armor gone in 10 seconds. That would be hella cool to see.

Do you people seriously think there is going to some major reworking of any system before launch? Or are you just posting these for your own entertainment. I'll give you a clue, not one system will get any type of major rework before launch and once launched it's the way the game will be.
You can argue that's a bad idea all you want, but we have a limited time before launch. All we will get is band ****. Best to work on making the bandaids as good as possible or just stop posting.
Seriously, get a calendar ( PGI needs one too apparently as our July CDU is slipping to August) check how much time we have between now and launch (Sept 17 I believe) and realize we have the game we're getting at launch. Best decide how to tweak it or just get out.
And No, there won't be a delay. IGP wants this launched on that date and at launch we will get a "F2Ps are always in development" speech.
Seriously, if you want to argue with each other for arguments sake, go ahead. Nothing major is being reworked before launch. I don't support that idea, I'm just realistic.

[ExplodedZombie]

Good write-up. However, I wonder if you've ever tried to balance a MMO. It's difficult. And not because math is hard. It's because adding the human element throws a huge wrench in the gears. Add the fact that this is essentially a FPS on top of that, and I'm sure the TT values become even harder to use.