30 replies to this topic

[Lykaon]

The simplest solutions are the most elegant.

Just assign Hardpoints a max critical space value unique to mech variants and specific hardpoints carried on specific variants.

There is no need to alter any stock designs,just keep the critical space per hardpoint capable of holding the stock configurations.

By addressing hardpoints directly we can shift game balance away from broad over arcing concepts like heat or power values or whatever suggested all encompassing rules.

If each and every mech and variant could be directly adjusted we avoid unintended nerfing of non problem chassis.

As for "stock" boat designs like Awesomes or Hunchback 4Ps or whatever.

We already have a mechanic in place to address these chassis on an individual basses and that mechanic is the Quirks mechanics.

By adjusting specific chassis with hardpoint crit space caps and quirks the Devs will have the ability to target specific "problem" mechs and not potentially damage the function and viability of an unintended chassis with system wide mechanics.

Another side effect is the preservation of intended roles of specific mech varients.

If an Awesome 8Q or 9M were the only mechs we currently have access to with the capacity to mount three PPCs then maybe we will see Awesomes instead of Stalkers.

[Elizander]

Dudeman3k, on 02 July 2013 - 07:09 PM, said:

You know its bad when you need to mount 3 PPC and an XL 295 on your Treb to be any sort of a player. 15 missile tubes for looks maybe?

I feel the pin-point High alpha needs to be addressed yet again. It's like an AWP only game style... but you can still run and gun with the same effect.

please PGI, look into rewarding multiple weapon systems. The damage to internals is moot in a game where 2 alphas will end you anyways, what were you trying to say implementing that?

Fighting games prevent things like this by reducing damage of attacks the more hits your combo has. Perhaps firing an Alpha over the limit will reduce the effectiveness of the weapons (no logic needed) or just implement an Alpha damage cap for all weapons fired without a 0.5 second delay between shots. It's the simplest solution but the least logical.

PGI can also drop the travel speed of the regular PPC and maintain the high travel speed for the ER PPC. Longer range means it should travel faster anyway and just nerf the PPC to something that isn't on the same level as a Gauss Rifle to prevent combining the two effectively.

Missiles also need an indirect fire mode that can blow past cover if someone is maintaining lock but make the spread of Indirect Fire mode larger or just a general shotgun blast at the ground like artillery strikes. This will obviously deal way less damage than an artillery strike.

Edited by Elizander, 03 July 2013 - 05:52 AM.

[Skyfaller]

Dudeman3k, on 02 July 2013 - 07:09 PM, said:

You know its bad when you need to mount 3 PPC and an XL 295 on your Treb to be any sort of a player. 15 missile tubes for looks maybe?

I feel the pin-point High alpha needs to be addressed yet again. It's like an AWP only game style... but you can still run and gun with the same effect.

please PGI, look into rewarding multiple weapon systems. The damage to internals is moot in a game where 2 alphas will end you anyways, what were you trying to say implementing that?

I've said it in many other posts. The problem is not the weapons nor the heat. Those can be nerfed/buffed all they want the REASON why the alphas are so effective remains: Pinpoint convergence.

For example, the soon to come 'heat penalty' patch that will have 3 or more PPCs fired together have a penalty of up to +40 heat or something will not change, at ALL, the fact that players will still be equipping their mechs to do the highest possible damage in one shot, at one armor location.

Right now, a 4 PPC boat has zero heat penalty and zero chance to 120% heat by firing one of these alpha hits.

With the heat penalty, the 4 PPC boat still does not reach 100% heat (maybe will reach 85% heat in that one shot).

With the heat penalty, players still get smacked by 40 pinpoint damage hits..it does not matter if they come less frequently.. they still happen. You can argue it limits one mech from firing multiple alphas but... the fact is, this 4PPC mech is not alone. His team-mates also boat PPCs for sure. So the poor SOB facing them gets multiple 40 damage instant, pinpoint hits.

With the heat penalty many players will simply switch to mechs that allow them to boat the highest pinpoint front-loaded damage they can. For example, instead of a 4 PPC stalker they'll switch to a 2PPC 2 Gauss K2/Highlander/Cataphract.

When/if that type of combo is nerfed they will switch to the next best thing. It will come to a point where even a 6 small pulser jenner will be nerfed somehow because it boats.

The solution is to have convergence NOT be pinpoint.

Draw a dot in a piece of paper. That is where the CT and cockpit weapons converge. Only they have perfect convergence.
Draw a circle around that dot, 1cm radius. The left/right edges of that circles is where the RT/LT weapons will hit respectively.
Draw a circle round the RT/LT circle, 2cm radius from the dot. The left/right edges of it is where the arm weapons would hit respectively.

The 1cm/2cm is just for you to see on paper ...the actual distance will be up to PGI to determine. The point is to have only the CT/Cockpit hit where the weapon is aimed, the RT/LT and arms would hit just to the left and right of the center aimpoint. Not perfect convergence but they will hit a mech's chest area at least.

This instantly fixes the pinpoint damage issue. a six PPC stalker firing on an atlas CT would end up hitting the right and left CT with 3 PPCs each (if perfectly aimed at the atlas upper chest).

[GODzillaGSPB]

We could divide into two groups:

Group One, unwilling to give up their sense of honor and fair play, could stop playing.

Group Two, who is finally convinced that fair play is BS and switches to all high-alpha-builds.

In the end the game will be 100% high-alpha and I BET that those who were running the builds in the first place will not enjoy it anymore.

[Ryvucz]

Roland, on 02 July 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

No, they wouldn't.

High damage alpha builds are the most effective way to kill mechs.

Thus, they are going to dominate the game forever, until this stops being the case.

In reality, they've dominated the game throughout the history of mechwarrior, including the entirety of MWO's existence.. it was simply the case that the steering wheel underhive was unaware of this simple truth until it trickled all the way down into the basement and they got to see it first hand.

Currently you are rewarded greatly for high damage, remove the rewards, people will change.

[Lostdragon]

Ryvucz, on 03 July 2013 - 10:16 AM, said:

Currently you are rewarded greatly for high damage, remove the rewards, people will change.

That is a ridiculous premise. High damage is not the issue, the issue is high damage getting delivered unerringly to a specific location in large bursts. Even if you remove all damage rewards people will still use high alpha builds because they are the best and easiest way to kill an enemy mech, and killing the enemy is a victory condition.

[Ryvucz]

Lostdragon, on 03 July 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

That is a ridiculous premise. High damage is not the issue, the issue is high damage getting delivered unerringly to a specific location in large bursts. Even if you remove all damage rewards people will still use high alpha builds because they are the best and easiest way to kill an enemy mech, and killing the enemy is a victory condition.

Tournaments support the theory of high rewards for damage. Remove the damage rewards, see what happens.

[Lostdragon]

Ryvucz, on 03 July 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

Tournaments support the theory of high rewards for damage. Remove the damage rewards, see what happens.

Removing tournament rewards does not change the meta outside the tournament.

[Ryvucz]

Lostdragon, on 03 July 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

Removing tournament rewards does not change the meta outside the tournament.

You get rewards for high damage outside of tournaments.

High damage alpha builds were made for tournaments to score high.

Promoting high damage results in high damage builds.

See what I'm getting at, or should I give up?

[Lostdragon]

Ryvucz, on 03 July 2013 - 11:46 AM, said:

You get rewards for high damage outside of tournaments.

High damage alpha builds were made for tournaments to score high.

Promoting high damage results in high damage builds.

See what I'm getting at, or should I give up?

I think you should give up if you somehow think removing damaged based rewards will curb the popularity of the easiest and deadliest type of build. As long as the point is to win and you can win by killing the other team then changing reward structures will do nothing to reduce builds that are low skill, low risk, and more effective relative to every other build type. How can you incentivize DPS builds in a way that does not also reward high alphas? Getting ahead in the numbers game is the best way to win a match. The best way to do that is to get kills quickly. The best way to do that is to put 40-60 point alpha strikes into enemies before they can effectively fight back. Changing rewards is not going to magically make 4 AC2s better than 4 PPCs.

I fully understand what you are trying to say, I just think what you believe is way out of touch with reality.

[Ningyo]

amusingly 4 PPC isn't even a high damage build, the point is you deal damage so precisely your total damage tends to be lower. A high damage build would be 3 UAC/5, or 4 AC/2 type things which spread their damage across an enemy mech.