519 replies to this topic

[LaserAngel]

I hope to see the results of the Pulse Laser tweaking. I know this is going to be looked over but what about decreasing the cycle time on the SRM 2 and SRM 4 to 3 and 3.5 seconds respectively? I doubt many people are going to fear faster cycling SRM 2 and it brings it more in line with the Medium Laser.

[Koniving]

Ryvucz, on 25 July 2013 - 02:38 PM, said:

Exactly! BLAM!

Unless they forgot what brand of microwave Garth uses, maybe he can repost that.

We actually have a gap. Typically PGI releases one mech of each weight class before moving on to the next series. With Orion and Flea, we are actually missing the Assault and Medium of that series.

The Phoenix mechs are the beginning of an all new series.

LaserAngel, on 27 July 2013 - 07:31 AM, said:

I hope to see the results of the Pulse Laser tweaking. I know this is going to be looked over but what about decreasing the cycle time on the SRM 2 and SRM 4 to 3 and 3.5 seconds respectively? I doubt many people are going to fear faster cycling SRM 2 and it brings it more in line with the Medium Laser.

I like this idea, actually. To tell the truth I had no idea the recycle time on the SRM-2 was so long. When you consider that SRM-6 reloads in 4 seconds, then why wouldn't the SRM-2 reload in 3 seconds or less?

[Warge]

Belorion, on 26 July 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

The 2ML, 3SRM6 CN9-A is still one of the best builds there is, and neither hard point changes, nor buffing small weapons would effect that.

What's about fixed number of tubes for each missile hardpoint? 3*SRM6 CN9-A build will be nerfed.

Edited by Warge, 27 July 2013 - 08:13 AM.

[Fenris Krinkovich]

Koniving, on 27 July 2013 - 07:47 AM, said:

We actually have a gap. Typically PGI releases one mech of each weight class before moving on to the next series. With Orion and Flea, we are actually missing the Assault and Medium of that series.

WE CANNOT AFFORD A MECH SERIES GAP

[Koniving]

Fenris Krinkovich, on 27 July 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

WE CANNOT AFFORD A MECH SERIES GAP

We need moar! Another medium and assault! Maybe something on the assault side with no energy slots... o.o;

[DirePhoenix]

Orkdung, on 27 July 2013 - 07:24 AM, said:

Here's a fix for roles.

Simply ( ) code bonuses to chassis. If you're a Light or Medium and you cap then you will get bonuses. If you are an Atlas, with 6 other friendly mechs on the field, and you're capping, negative points are awarded.
Heavies and Assaults should not be capping, unless desperate. i.e. know your role.
The simple fact that a light gets no extra bonus for doing it's job and has a pitiful score at the end of a conquest game is extremely disheartening.

I would make a caveat to that. If we "cap" by simply standing next to a base, then it's probably through the sheer intimidation of our multi-ton war machines standing outside that's convincing the people inside the facilities to switch their allegiance over.

As such, larger 'mechs are more intimidating than smaller 'mechs. If you're a squishy person without a battlemech, you're probably going to surrender to an Atlas a lot faster than you'd surrender to a Locust.

So, make cap speed tonnage based. The more tons of 'mechs sitting outside a base, the faster they surrender. HOWEVER, make the individual rewards for capping inversely proportional to the tonnage of the 'mech the player used. So lights get a bigger bonus for capping, even though it takes them longer (individually) to cap. Assault 'Mechs can cap quickly (once they get to a base), but there is less reward for them to do so (which is also fitting, since capping is not as much of a challenge for them).

[LaserAngel]

Koniving, on 27 July 2013 - 07:47 AM, said:

I like this idea, actually. To tell the truth I had no idea the recycle time on the SRM-2 was so long. When you consider that SRM-6 reloads in 4 seconds, then why wouldn't the SRM-2 reload in 3 seconds or less?

Well thanks. Now to go find the appropriate feedback thread.

[Mystere]

DirePhoenix, on 27 July 2013 - 09:20 AM, said:

So, make cap speed tonnage based. The more tons of 'mechs sitting outside a base, the faster they surrender. HOWEVER, make the individual rewards for capping inversely proportional to the tonnage of the 'mech the player used. So lights get a bigger bonus for capping, even though it takes them longer (individually) to cap. Assault 'Mechs can cap quickly (once they get to a base), but there is less reward for them to do so (which is also fitting, since capping is not as much of a challenge for them).

I'm going to have to disagree with this. We already have a "bigger gun/mech wins" issue. This will will just make it worse.

[Elizander]

I also posted this in another thread made by PP regarding Medium Mechs so I'll just repost it here. These kinds of perks can buff any mech to make up for their penalties without changing the mech construction system (weight, tonnage, armor points, etc). Again, these are just some rushed numbers from ideas that popped into my head.

The basis for these ideas are the 10% component damage reduction that Centurions and Catapults get from their open/close missile bay doors.

Give Medium Mechs more special perks such as:

Hunchbacks with hunches (4G, 4H, 4J, 4P) - Due to the specialized and bulky housing of the right torso, these mechs receive 20% less damage when hit in this location (effectively raising the armor from 40/8->48/8). The bulkier design also reduces critical hit damage to components in the right torso by 20% (Defensive perk).

The 4P's specialized right torso allows smaller energy weapons (medium/small) to be more heat efficient thanks to the design so firing 6 energy weapons from the right torso will allow 10% of the heat to be quickly dissipated after 0.5 seconds assuming no other weapon from other locations are fired (Offensive perk).

The 4G's right torso is so robust that it can handle more violent forces than other mechs (it's freaking huge). It's specially made for ballistic weapons, particularly the AC/20. Due to whatever technical mumbo-jumbo that you can think of, AC's deal 10% more damage when fired from the right torso of a 4G and an AC/20's cooldown is reduced by 0.5 seconds (Offensive perk).

The CN9-A and the AL's left arm takes 20% less damage. The 9D's left arm takes 10% less damage and the YLW's left arm takes 15% less damage. (Defensive perk)

Critical damage to items housed in a Centurions right arm is reduced by 20%. (Defensive perk).

[DirePhoenix]

Mystere, on 27 July 2013 - 09:32 AM, said:

I'm going to have to disagree with this. We already have a "bigger gun/mech wins" issue. This will will just make it worse.

My idea is that yes, the bigger 'mech will cap faster, but that's on the condition that the bigger 'mech can get to the cap in the first place. Also, since there would be less reward for large 'mechs capping, they should be less motivated to do so over blowing up the other 'mechs.

Light 'mechs can and do get to the enemy bases faster, but if you give them the same cap speed as everyone else, then everyone would just pilot lights to cap as fast as possible. Make them cap slower, but give them a larger reward for taking that risk.

Edited by DirePhoenix, 27 July 2013 - 10:28 AM.

[Mystere]

DirePhoenix, on 27 July 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

Light 'mechs can and do get to the enemy bases faster, but if you give them the same cap speed as everyone else, then everyone would just pilot lights to cap as fast as possible. Make them cap slower, but give them a larger reward for taking that risk.

Given that much more heavies and assaults are being played right now compared to lights (i.e. too many TDM-oriented players), and capping is an activity denigrated by a whole lot of players (i.e. again, because of these same TDM-oriented players), I don't think giving lights even more disadvantages will help their currently almost useless purpose.

Remember, many people play to win and do not care about rewards. Winning is the reward.

[DirePhoenix]

Mystere, on 27 July 2013 - 10:40 AM, said:

Given that much more heavies and assaults are being played right now compared to lights (i.e. too many TDM-oriented players), and capping is an activity denigrated by a whole lot of players (i.e. again, because of these same TDM-oriented players), I don't think giving lights even more disadvantages will help their currently almost useless purpose.

Remember, many people play to win and do not care about rewards. Winning is the reward.

If you make it so that each base has a fixed number of "capping points", and that each mech capping makes a contribution proportional to its mass per tick (but gets the same reward per tick), then larger 'mechs will have less reward (motivation) for capping, but can cap faster (or push the cap faster whenever they finally reach the cap). Light mechs can get to the caps fast, and the longer they stay on the cap, the more reward they will receive. Since lighter 'mechs won't contribute as many capping points per tick, they get more reward for capping (since they will have more ticks contributed to them).

If you extend this out to the mechanic of defending, where mass of each side is compared, and the difference gets contributed (instead of the current mechanic where one mech of any size blocks any other mech of any size), you will see more interesting gameplay emerge. Assaults and Heavies will be more likely to defend or combat the enemies, while Lights and Mediums will be more motivated to cap and scout while running from cap to cap.

Edited by DirePhoenix, 27 July 2013 - 11:07 AM.

[Elizander]

DirePhoenix, on 27 July 2013 - 10:26 AM, said:

My idea is that yes, the bigger 'mech will cap faster, but that's on the condition that the bigger 'mech can get to the cap in the first place. Also, since there would be less reward for large 'mechs capping, they should be less motivated to do so over blowing up the other 'mechs.

Light 'mechs can and do get to the enemy bases faster, but if you give them the same cap speed as everyone else, then everyone would just pilot lights to cap as fast as possible. Make them cap slower, but give them a larger reward for taking that risk.

In games where I don't get a light mech on my team my 90kph Pretty Baby does the job.

[Butane9000]

They could also make the pilot skill trees more unique on a per chassis/variant style. Such as:

Centurion Basics (across the board)
- Increase heat dissipation - 1,000 XP (what it is now)
- Increase heat threshold - 1,000 XP (what it is now)
- Increase torso twist radius - 2,500 XP (what it is now)
- Increase torso movement speed - 2,500 XP (what it is now)
- increase arm movement range - 3,000 XP (what it is now)
- Increase acceleration/deceleration speed - 5,000 XP (combine the 2 currently separate efficiencies)

Centurion CN9-A basics
- Reduce damage to right arm by 5% and left arm by 10% - 7,500 XP
- Increase ballistic ammunition carried per ton by 10% (rounded down) 7,500 XP

Centurion CN9-AL basics
- Reduce heat generation from right arm mounted energy weapons by 5% - 7,500 XP
- Reduce damage to left arm by 15% - 7,500 XP

Centurion CN9-D basics
- Improve mech turning rate by 7.5% - 7,500 XP
- Improve mech movement speed by 5% - 7,500 XP

Centurion Elites (across the board)
- Increase movement speed by 5% - 7,500 XP

Centurion CN9-A Elites
- Reduce damage to right arm by additional 5% and left arm by additional 10% - 15,000 XP
- Increase ballistic ammunition carried by additional 5% (rounded up instead of down) - 15,000 XP
- Increase effectiveness of target info gathering module by 5% - 12,500 XP

Centurion CN9-AL Elites
- Reduce heat generated by right arm mounted weapons by an additional 10% - 15,000 XP
- Reduce damage to left arm by additional 15% - 15,000 XP
- increase effectiveness of sensor range module by 5% - 12,500 XP

Centurion CN9-D Elites
- Increase mech turning rate by additonal 7.5% - 15,000 XP
- Increase mech movement speed by additional 5% - 15,000 XP
- Increase effectiveness of capture accelerator by 5% - 12,500 XP

Centurion Master (across the board)
- Add additional module slot - 21,500 XP

This way every variant has to have the same amount of experience but each variant has their own unique quirks.

[Deathlike]

Elric von Rabenfels, on 27 July 2013 - 05:20 AM, said:

This quote stood out for me.

We know exactly what happens when we make realistic assumptions on when content is going to be deployed.

Just one word:
Orion.

AFAIK, they have "cashed in" on their "6 unknown mechs" that were ready to go. The mechs in the Phoenix Project, Victor, and Quickdraw are the 6 mechs that were unannounced to that point.

[Jungle Rhino]

What is the point of making light/medium mechs more agile when seismic sensor gives away their position anyway? - it's not like it is hard to hit them now that HSR is in.

Your P2W GXP modules are breaking core gameplay elements. Coolshot needs to go, and seismic needs to scale relative to the chassis carrying it vs the chassis they are trying to detect. i.e. an Atlas stomping around at full speed should never know if there is a spider sneaking up behind him.

[DirePhoenix]

Jungle Rhino, on 27 July 2013 - 03:52 PM, said:

What is the point of making light/medium mechs more agile when seismic sensor gives away their position anyway? - it's not like it is hard to hit them now that HSR is in.

There are further changes scheduled to be made to seismic sensor. Nothing in this game is complete or static. Consider everything here to be early iterations until September.

Elizander, on 27 July 2013 - 11:08 AM, said:

In games where I don't get a light mech on my team my 90kph Pretty Baby does the job.

You're also sacrificing a bit more than most assaults to push those 80tons at 90kph, and therefore probably not performing typical assault roles well when you're trying to make that Awesome dance like a Commando.

[Thunder Child]

Well, there was some information in there, I'll give them that. Good to see that they are looking at giving mediums and lights some love. Not so good to see that they are still trying to cram 3PV down our throats, despite the massive outcry against it. Was it 4? Or maybe 5 Polls that were locked and buried because the negative opinion towards 3PV was so strong.

[Grimmnyr]

Jungle Rhino, on 27 July 2013 - 03:52 PM, said:

What is the point of making light/medium mechs more agile when seismic sensor gives away their position anyway? - it's not like it is hard to hit them now that HSR is in.

Your P2W GXP modules are breaking core gameplay elements. Coolshot needs to go, and seismic needs to scale relative to the chassis carrying it vs the chassis they are trying to detect. i.e. an Atlas stomping around at full speed should never know if there is a spider sneaking up behind him.

The agility would allow you to converge your weapons on a target more quickly and it would allow you to torso twist faster to spread out incoming damage.

Also, these mechs are 3050 technology, a mech upgraded with the appropriate sensors should very much be able to sense that a mech is behind it, especially a mech that does not equip ECM.

Crazycajun, on 27 July 2013 - 05:56 PM, said:

More CapWarrior Online to ensure that more people don't play or i'd just well sell anything i have thats bigger then a medium...

hell why even bother with weaps..lets just remove them since ur hell bent on eliminating fighting all together...we'll all stand round the base in a race see who's caps faster..

on top of that..u pretty much stated nothing we didn't already know..



u have lights running round killing assaults in mass..

wtf more love do u need? that not even remotely suppose to come close to happening

Putting collisions and knockdowns back in the game will keep lights at a distance.

[Solis Obscuri]

Overall, this looks good. Still a bit nervous about Dx11, though - hopefully it doesn't blow up like that one hilariously awful patch in CB!

I'm excited to see better medium/light 'mech incentives, as I very much enjoy piloting mediums. The improvements to agility for mediums will be very welcome - I noticed in ATD43 you mention better torso twist rates, which is good, but what about better turn rates, too?

Also excited to hear that weight limits will go in on drops. I think that will be more interesting than the straight weight-class matching was - is it going to apply to 8-mans as well as 4-man PUG drops?