12 replies to this topic

[Suko]

I don't start many new topics these days, but I really feel like the changes to seismic aren't going to do much to solve some of the major problems I (and I assume others) have with it.

One thing I like about MWO is the slower-paced combat. It gives you time to think, plan, and spring a trap. I really enjoyed the anticipation of piloting my mech through the cave in forest colony, or flanking that rock outcropping in Caustic to get behind the enemy and hit them without them knowing whats happened. However, the current seismic module makes all of these maneuvers REALLY tough to pull off while keeping the element of surprise. If it does work, it's because the enemy doesn't have seismic equipped, or they weren't paying attention to it for the 15 seconds it takes to flank them.

First, I agree that shortening the range is a good move and will help. However, the times when I notice seismic being the biggest gameplay/tactics destroyer is on a map like Frozen City. The team that starts in the lower city can park a mech near the hill by the dropship's nose and (even with the upcoming reduced range) they can see if any mechs are coming through the tunnel without having to BE in the tunnel. This means they can keep their forces 100% focused on the front line and only peel units away if or when they see a mech slipping by on seismic.

Seismic is an interesting module and I think it can (and will) make this game more fun in the long run. However, even with the range reduction it will likely still be too much. Many of us (myself included) were hoping PGI would take a more elegant approach to balancing it instead of the simple and direct approach of reducing ranges.

It's been brought up many times already, but just to put them in one spot, here's some popular suggestion;

A) Seismic only works when your mech is stationary and degrades as the mech's speed increases.

B) An mech's weight and speed should correspond to smaller/larger blips and increased/decreased detection distance on an enemy's seismic map.

C) Have seismic be an active tool, not a passive one. The pilot must activate seismic and it functions for a period of time and then deactivates to recharge or re-calibrate as a cooldown.

D) Introduce a counter module that significantly reduces a mech's seismic signature to the enemy. Just call it mech sneakers or something. This could at least be an interesting counter to the seismic module.

Any of these options would've made for a much more interesting Rock, Paper, Scissor gameplay. Instead, the only way to counter seismic is to stay 200+ meters out from all mechs (because you never know who might have it equipped). This won't do you much good if you're trying to flank the enemy team through the tunnel in Frozen City. As long as they're sitting against the wall on the outside, they'll know you're there.

I think you all know where I'm going with this post, so there's no need to ramble on more. In short, I hope that PGI tries to be a bit more elegant with its solutions to bringing balance to MWO. It's easy to tweak numbers, but often numbers and stats aren't enough to truly balance gameplay elements. Sometimes the best way to balance something is to introduce counter-balance in the form of other mechanics and tactics. Sometimes a nerf stick just isn't enough.

[FrDrake]

When you decrease the radius of a circle by 36% how much area of the circle is lost?

Hopefully someone on this board completed high school geometry besides me......

Edited by FrDrake, 18 July 2013 - 01:24 PM.

[Slate Slabrock]

FrDrake, on 18 July 2013 - 01:23 PM, said:

When you decrease the radius of a circle by 36% how much area of the circle is lost?

Hopefully someone on this board completed high school geometry besides me......

I am not sure I did. I was taking calculus and trig mostly in high school.

[Homeless Bill]

As I've stated before, I just don't think it should be in MWO. Flanking is hard enough, you can hear the rumble of footsteps when you're standing still (it used to take skill to wallhack =P), and it does nothing good for the game. I've thought about the concept and how to balance it, but I simply see no positive benefit to gameplay by leaving it in.

It's basically an anti-tactics module. **** Seismic.

[Suko]

FrDrake, on 18 July 2013 - 01:23 PM, said:

When you decrease the radius of a circle by 36% how much area of the circle is lost?

Hopefully someone on this board completed high school geometry besides me......

I have a Master's Degree in Architecture, so yes, I can do the math...but why does the area seismic covers apply to anything I said above? I never mentioned the density of mechs within the area around a mech carrying seismic. I gave a clear, obvious problem of the current (and modified) seismic system above and you you ask me how the area is reduced? Why does that matter at all? Are we trying to sell the house and we'll get more for each sq. meter we can cast seismic over? You don't hear radar operators bragging about the "area" their radar can sweep, it's the range and how far out they detect aircraft that really matters.

Seriously, what are you getting at here?

Homeless Bill, on 18 July 2013 - 01:40 PM, said:

As I've stated before, I just don't think it should be in MWO. Flanking is hard enough, you can hear the rumble of footsteps when you're standing still (it used to take skill to wallhack =P), and it does nothing good for the game. I've thought about the concept and how to balance it, but I simply see no positive benefit to gameplay by leaving it in.

It's basically an anti-tactics module. **** Seismic.

I somewhat agree with you. In it's current state, seismic is pretty much an anti-strategy tool, and I don't like it. However, if they tweak it or gave it some kind of detriment to using it, I think it could work.

Suppressors in FPS games are a good example. In BF3, a person with a suppressed weapon doesn't show up on the minimap when he/she shoots. However, the weapon's accuracy and range are usually affected, too.

MWO could (should) do something similar to seismic. Make it a tactical choice, not the defacto obvious one. At least if it were an active module with a cooldown it would make it so that a pilot needs to make a tactical decision on when to activate the sensors to give them/their team an advantage.

Or make it so that when the module is in use, it restricts the mech using it to walking speed so it can function properly. This would be a pretty hefty trade-off. I just think having it on and working 24/7 is dumb and takes no skill or effort and overall is boring to the gameplay.

Edited by ShadowVFX, 18 July 2013 - 01:50 PM.

[Homeless Bill]

Turning into an active module rather than a passive one would be workable in my opinion, depending on implementation. I'm just sick of the always-on Dumbass Alert.

It's just like when Betty used to say, "Targeted" for a while when you got targeted. Being sneaky in an Awesome is hard enough. The last thing this game needs is a module that replaces situational awareness.

[Pyrrho]

Area of Circle = pi * radius^2

for radius of 3 --> pi * 3^2 ---> pi * 9 = 28.27

Reduced radius 36% ; pi * (radius - .36(radius))^2 --> pi * (.64*radius)^2

for radius of 3 --> pi * (3 - .36(3))^2 ---> pi * 1.92^2 ---> pi * 3.68 = 11.58

% change in Area = (New Area / Old Area) * 100 ---> (11.58/28.27)*100 --> .4096 * 100 ---> 41%

Any methodology problems? I can calculate pretty well, but making sure I am doing the right calculations can be tricky.

[Maxx Blue]

I think there might still be ways to salvage seismic by reducing range and making it give you MUCH less precise position information, but no matter how much you nerf it, the current form makes 'tactical flanking' damn near impossible. By tactical flanking, I mean you have made contact with the enemy and are trying to quickly roll around their flank in the hopes that they don't respond in time. This would be different from strategic flanking, where you head for the edge of the map right at the beginning of the game and try to get out wide enough to flank before ever seeing where the enemy went.

The only nerfs I've thought about that seemed like they might potentially allow tactical flanking are changing the effect from a blip on your map to just a warning light/message that lets you know a mech is SOMEWHERE within 200m without any indication of direction, or lighting up whole grid-squares on the map if seismic detects an enemy there. Both of those options have the potential to, in some situations, make it impossible to see if seismic is being triggered by a flanker or just by the pile of mechs you know is in front of you.

Edited by Maxx Blue, 18 July 2013 - 02:06 PM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

ShadowVFX, on 18 July 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

I somewhat agree with you. In it's current state, seismic is pretty much an anti-strategy tool, and I don't like it. However, if they tweak it or gave it some kind of detriment to using it, I think it could work.

See I disagree with this statement since I use Seismic specially as a STRATEGY tool. It allows me to indentify where the enemy is so I can plan my movement and flanking routs accordingly rather than just blindly rely on luck to keep me from running into an enemy or enemies where I don't expect them. Then add in the fact not everyone uses Seismic and now I have an excellent tool for faciliting effective flanking and surprise tactics.

I mean I can pretty much tell by how the blip reacts if he has decected me on Seismic and can react according and/or definately use it to get the drop on just about anyone.

Also since seismic works both ways, if I want to go cave and see no blips as I approach the cave, I can feel assured I will be able to sneak though without running into the entire enemy team coming through from the other side.

People think of it as cheap or to use your words, an anti-strategy tool because they are only thinking about what it no longer allows them to do rather than thing about all the new things they now can do because of it. Call it the glass half full concept if you like but I might rather have seismic available than to run around blind.

Here is a real military example, Nightvision goggles. Without them you can't see crap at night unless there is a bright moon and even then moving in enemy territory without blundering into them is a crapshoot you hope doesn't occur, especially if they have more numbers or firepower than you do. However with them, you can see much more clearly at night and hopefully identify where the enemy is and what they are doing before they do the same to you. This allows you to react faster and revise your strategy rather than rely on blind luck to get you through the night. Add in the fact that more than 50% of the enemy probably isn't using any sort of nightvision and I can tell you I sure as hell wouldn't be questioning its usefulness to me.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 18 July 2013 - 02:35 PM.

[Pyrrho]

Quote

You don't hear radar operators bragging about the "area" their radar can sweep, it's the range and how far out they detect aircraft that really matters.

Forgive me if I am being naive, but isn't the "range/how far out" aircraft detection works directly related to the AREA of a radar sweep (ie; I will see more aircraft at further distances with a larger area sweep)?

[Xmith]

ShadowVFX, on 18 July 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

I don't start many new topics these days, but I really feel like the changes to seismic aren't going to do much to solve some of the major problems I (and I assume others) have with it.

One thing I like about MWO is the slower-paced combat. It gives you time to think, plan, and spring a trap. I really enjoyed the anticipation of piloting my mech through the cave in forest colony, or flanking that rock outcropping in Caustic to get behind the enemy and hit them without them knowing whats happened. However, the current seismic module makes all of these maneuvers REALLY tough to pull off while keeping the element of surprise. If it does work, it's because the enemy doesn't have seismic equipped, or they weren't paying attention to it for the 15 seconds it takes to flank them.

First, I agree that shortening the range is a good move and will help. However, the times when I notice seismic being the biggest gameplay/tactics destroyer is on a map like Frozen City. The team that starts in the lower city can park a mech near the hill by the dropship's nose and (even with the upcoming reduced range) they can see if any mechs are coming through the tunnel without having to BE in the tunnel. This means they can keep their forces 100% focused on the front line and only peel units away if or when they see a mech slipping by on seismic.

Seismic is an interesting module and I think it can (and will) make this game more fun in the long run. However, even with the range reduction it will likely still be too much. Many of us (myself included) were hoping PGI would take a more elegant approach to balancing it instead of the simple and direct approach of reducing ranges.

It's been brought up many times already, but just to put them in one spot, here's some popular suggestion;

A) Seismic only works when your mech is stationary and degrades as the mech's speed increases.

An mech's weight and speed should correspond to smaller/larger blips and increased/decreased detection distance on an enemy's seismic map.

C) Have seismic be an active tool, not a passive one. The pilot must activate seismic and it functions for a period of time and then deactivates to recharge or re-calibrate as a cooldown.

D) Introduce a counter module that significantly reduces a mech's seismic signature to the enemy. Just call it mech sneakers or something. This could at least be an interesting counter to the seismic module.

Any of these options would've made for a much more interesting Rock, Paper, Scissor gameplay. Instead, the only way to counter seismic is to stay 200+ meters out from all mechs (because you never know who might have it equipped). This won't do you much good if you're trying to flank the enemy team through the tunnel in Frozen City. As long as they're sitting against the wall on the outside, they'll know you're there.

I think you all know where I'm going with this post, so there's no need to ramble on more. In short, I hope that PGI tries to be a bit more elegant with its solutions to bringing balance to MWO. It's easy to tweak numbers, but often numbers and stats aren't enough to truly balance gameplay elements. Sometimes the best way to balance something is to introduce counter-balance in the form of other mechanics and tactics. Sometimes a nerf stick just isn't enough.

Not all mechs are equipped with seismic sensors but they all have radar. If a mech is close enought to the caves, you will be picked up on radar. At the start of the match, the strategy I see lately is teams spreading out from the caves and out to the dropship.

[Nutlink]

I wouldn't mind the seismic sensor if it either just projected in the front like the normal radar so you can see if someone is behind a building in front of you (leaving their rear and flank wide open) or if it just pinged within range but without spotting it on the map.

Edited by BOTA49, 18 July 2013 - 02:58 PM.

[Pyrrho]

New MC only item: Seismic Decoy Module - drops false seismic readings where deployed. The animators can make it poop out of the back end of the 'mechs.