376 replies to this topic

[Hugh Fairgrove]

Viper69, on 31 July 2013 - 04:31 AM, said:

I wish I could say but it would call into question peoples lineage and evolutionary progression and probably get me in trouble.

But seriously. They cant figure out an effective cone of fire mechanic that kicks in on heat level nor do they want to lower the damage of all the weapons clinging to antequated TT numbers that caused them to double armor on mechs. So the root cause of all their issue is TT damage being applied more times in ten seconds than the game they are modeling from were designed. If say the PPCs damage were dropped to its TT damage/number of shots in ten seconds that would be a massive start. But no they want to keep adding arbitrary crap to their ever growing number of fixes that only fix symptoms not the cause. Glad these guys arent doctors they would prescribe advil for persistent migraines that were being caused by a brain tumor.

After starting to play in late March I have to tend to agree with Viper. I think alot of this is just basiclly bandaiding untill after launch to keep the masses from leaving due to game imbalance. Hoping these issues are adressed more seriously after they get most of the launch features completed even though a lot is probably not going to be ready by the launch date. I enjoy the game, but I understand why a lot of people are upset with balance. We'll just have to see how it pans out, with the new Xbox and game season rolling around I might not be putting as much time in with MWO, but I bought an Overload package and I want to stick around long enough to see how PGI implements CW and the Clans. If things don't even out by then I'll probably still jump on once in awhile, but won't be putting in as much time or money for packages/bundles.

[Telemetry]

If there a forum or some other outlet where we can have some interaction with the devs and figure out what is going to save this game? I am all for trying to get this train back on the rails.

I have a decent investment in this game:

- Legendary Founder x2
- Project Phoenix Overlord x2
- EIGHTY ONE mech bays all filled with mechs, most of them master xp
- Spent easily over $500 on MC the past year
- Sarah's Mech x2

(this is for my account and my son's account)


I really just want this game to succeed. Let's talk!

[Suri Curume]

Nauht, on 30 July 2013 - 10:38 PM, said:

Nah cos they could boat LL, PPCs. Ofc when compared to those it's inferior but with the heat penalties that's changed.

Now with that gone and no curb to the LPL it would be next to be boated for that big alpha.

You guys can't honestly see that?

You keep arguing that it's a pre-emptive strike to keep LPLs from being the next OP...

I'm sorry, but that's as stupid as the US pre-emptively striking Canada to keep them from becoming the next world military superpower. They added a convoluted system that kind of nerfed the weapon system that people have been complaining about for months (PPCs) but hit every competitor for that weapon's spot even harder.

They're going to keep Ghost Heat, and that's fine. It's not the best solution in my mind, but it could work if the numbers are changed on some things. The problem is that PGI are notoriously slow when it comes to number tweaking. LLs, LPLs, and ERLLs should not have the same restriction as PPCs. Raise their max alpha to at least 3 (4 is preferable) and now you have a reason to take them over PPCs.

[Belorion]

I just took a look at my damage per game for various weapons. Both LL and LPL beat out the PPCs

[Viper69]

Telemetry, on 31 July 2013 - 05:29 AM, said:

If there a forum or some other outlet where we can have some interaction with the devs and figure out what is going to save this game? I am all for trying to get this train back on the rails.

I have a decent investment in this game:

- Legendary Founder x2
- Project Phoenix Overlord x2
- EIGHTY ONE mech bays all filled with mechs, most of them master xp
- Spent easily over $500 on MC the past year
- Sarah's Mech x2

(this is for my account and my son's account)


I really just want this game to succeed. Let's talk!

Look for the #saveMWO thread that is not locked. It has some really good information.

As for communicating with PGI? It is really hard but honestly it would be impossible or near so to respond to every thread asking a question. Hopefully it will change but who knows.

Edited by Viper69, 31 July 2013 - 06:00 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

OKAY. I had a post censored for NO reason in this thread. It had nothing offensive and was completely on topic. I am re-posting it now for the sake of importance:

Skyfaller said:

The problem is not heat. Its convergence. Always has been.

This game is built mostly around TT concepts and rules. TT only had pinpoint damage at a very high cost in equipment and had penalties of its own to do so. Normal combat was random hit location. In MWO real time that can be achieved by simply removing the convergence or adapting it so you can only make them if you have the target locked and aimed long enough for the convergence to narrow down ... just like it takes an LRM time to lock. If target moves past a threshold range (~50m of 'converged' range) the convergence lock timer resets.

You know what is interesting... The solution to ALL our problems... Has been in the Battletech source all along. It is a simple thing called a Targeting Computer. The rules read something like this:

Quote

The Targeting Computer was introduced by Clan Mongoose in 2860.[1] Targeting Computers are sophisticated pieces of electronics that, unlike normal targeting systems, physically help MechWarriors target their opponents. Recoil compensators and gyroscopic stabilizers are used to prevent normal weapon drift from factors such as recoil and movement while the computer accounts for atmospheric and other conditions to present an accurate "lead" on the target. This allows for more surgical precision of weapons fire, especially with naturally accurate systems, allowing for the user to hit specific parts on the target vehicle.

Further, they continue with the most important part:

Quote

The Targeting Computer can be used to help aim all direct fire weapons, including most energy and ballistic weapons. This results in a -1 to-hit modifier for all eligible weapons that tie in, or the ability to aim for a location that is not the head with a +3 to-hit penalty. Clan Targeting Computers weigh one ton and occupy one critical slot for every five tons of equipment they control (rounded up), while a comparable Inner Sphere version weighs one ton and occupies one critical slot for every four tons it controls (also rounded up). Total Warfare updated the rules to specify that Pulse Lasers (including Variable Speed Pulse Lasers and X-Pulse Lasers) as well as multi-shot firing autocannon cannot aim their fire, unless the affected autocannon are fired in single shot mode. In addition, an LB-X autocannon only receives the benefits if it is firing solid rounds instead of cluster ammunition.

Now, what that means, for example is, say, you have a 2x PPC, 2x ERPPC Stalker. That's 28 tons of equipment. So per the rules, the Targeting Computer (and components) would weigh 7 tons and take up 7 crits !!!!!!

That right there... That is a HUGE penalty. You want pinpoint aim? Great! You have to pay for it... bigtime. The Targeting Computer was not only the computer itself, but included things like servos and actuators to move and align the weapons.

I'm not sure but some things I've read said this tech wasn't available to the IS until 3062. Either way, THIS NEEDS TO BE REPRESENTED in this game. It'd go a LOOOOONG way towards fixing this broken game.

No Targeting Computer... Tough! No pinpoint convergence! You want it... pay for it.

Case closed. PGI just needs to stick to the rules and implement them as they were written for some things. By not doing so, they end up breaking the game and then putting convoluted, obfuscated systems that make no sense and don't work better than breaking the game worse than it already is.

Vote for the Targeting Computer... Today!

Edit: I am NO WAY endorsing a Cone of Fire. Not one bit. Don't even think of accusing me of doing so. Cones of fire SUCK!

No Targeting Computer--weapons shoot straight ahead. No convergence at all. They shoot straight ahead and you can still hit what you're aiming at if you know their relative impact point--which is consistent barring terrain changes/movement changes to your mech's position on the X/Y/Z axes.

Edited by Mister Blastman, 31 July 2013 - 05:57 AM.

[Viper69]

Arm weapons should have some sort of converging ability but they should also have a link up time to converge both arms on the impact point. Torso weapons should have some small amount of convergence but the closer you are to the target the less likely you will hit what you are directly aiming at using the crosshair.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mister Blastman, on 31 July 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

OKAY. I had a post censored for NO reason in this thread. It had nothing offensive and was completely on topic. I am re-posting it now for the sake of importance:



You know what is interesting... The solution to ALL our problems... Has been in the Battletech source all along. It is a simple thing called a Targeting Computer. The rules read something like this:



Further, they continue with the most important part:



Now, what that means, for example is, say, you have a 2x PPC, 2x ERPPC Stalker. That's 28 tons of equipment. So per the rules, the Targeting Computer (and components) would weigh 7 tons and take up 7 crits !!!!!!

That right there... That is a HUGE penalty. You want pinpoint aim? Great! You have to pay for it... bigtime. The Targeting Computer was not only the computer itself, but included things like servos and actuators to move and align the weapons.

I'm not sure but some things I've read said this tech wasn't available to the IS until 3062. Either way, THIS NEEDS TO BE REPRESENTED in this game. It'd go a LOOOOONG way towards fixing this broken game.

No Targeting Computer... Tough! No pinpoint convergence! You want it... pay for it.

Case closed. PGI just needs to stick to the rules and implement them as they were written for some things. By not doing so, they end up breaking the game and then putting convoluted, obfuscated systems that make no sense and don't work better than breaking the game worse than it already is.

Vote for the Targeting Computer... Today!

Edit: I am NO WAY endorsing a Cone of Fire. Not one bit. Don't even think of accusing me of doing so. Cones of fire SUCK!

No Targeting Computer--weapons shoot straight ahead. No convergence at all. They shoot straight ahead and you can still hit what you're aiming at if you know their relative impact point--which is consistent barring terrain changes/movement changes to your mech's position on the X/Y/Z axes.

so suddenly arm actuators serve no purpose?

You had an interesting idea closing til your closing argument.

[Fishhawk]

Mister Blastman, on 31 July 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

No Targeting Computer--weapons shoot straight ahead. No convergence at all. They shoot straight ahead and you can still hit what you're aiming at if you know their relative impact point--which is consistent barring terrain changes/movement changes to your mech's position on the X/Y/Z axes.

Right there you have lost the majority of your players. The revolt would be astounding.

"You mean I point my crosshairs at a mech and it fires off to the side?!? RAGEQUIT!!"

[armchairyoda]

Fishhawk, on 31 July 2013 - 06:53 AM, said:

Right there you have lost the majority of your players. The revolt would be astounding.

"You mean I point my crosshairs at a mech and it fires off to the side?!? RAGEQUIT!!"

Nah, all that is spelled out for you in the new player tutorial along with the various restrictions and abilities of various loadouts.

Oh, wait...

[veedubfreak]

Just remove the targetting reticle. There, sniping is fixed.

I'll take my payment in a refund for the 200 bucks I've wasted on this game in MC.

[Fishhawk]

veedubfreak, on 31 July 2013 - 07:05 AM, said:

Just remove the targetting reticle. There, sniping is fixed.

I'll take my payment in a refund for the 200 bucks I've wasted on this game in MC.

Again, players rage at "where am I aiming?!? I can't even tell what I'm hitting?!? This game S*CKS I RAGEQUIT!!!"

[Mister Blastman]

Bishop Steiner, on 31 July 2013 - 06:45 AM, said:

so suddenly arm actuators serve no purpose?

You had an interesting idea closing til your closing argument.

The arms can still aim at a spot--they just take longer without the computer and some arms have actuator limitations of say 10 degrees. When a mech is too close, they would have to actuate far more than 10 degrees so... well, the shot would not converge perfectly. With a targeting computer added... the weapons could then actuate while on the arm to complete the convergence.

[Ngamok]

Fishhawk, on 30 July 2013 - 07:16 PM, said:

Granted, I'm not an competitive player, but how has the heat scale penalty not worked? I just played a game and I moved around and shot other mechs and capped points just like I did last month. What is it that I should have been able to do that now that I cannot do?

It's definitely not the most elegant way of handling things, but I'm still trying to figure out how all of a sudden now the game is unplayable because of the heat scaling. (Pointing out that it is, in fact, not playable by some folks at the moment.)

It's unplayable because people want AlphaStrike Online. I appreciate the devs trying to slow down the combat some by adding in the heat penalties so people don't all walk around pushing 1 button for high damage alpha non stop. Also, it follows BT in that no one in the books used alpha strike every chance they got. They fired one weapon system and then another. People would rather this turn into Call of Duty where pressing 1 button to kill people is all they want.

[Ngamok]

Nauht, on 30 July 2013 - 10:38 PM, said:

Nah cos they could boat LL, PPCs. Ofc when compared to those it's inferior but with the heat penalties that's changed.

Now with that gone and no curb to the LPL it would be next to be boated for that big alpha.

You guys can't honestly see that?


Was gonna make up some smart reply but then I saw you liked your own post.

I would make an 8Q with 6 LPL if there was no heat penalty to them.

[Belorion]

Mister Blastman, on 31 July 2013 - 05:57 AM, said:

OKAY. I had a post censored for NO reason in this thread. It had nothing offensive and was completely on topic. I am re-posting it now for the sake of importance:



You know what is interesting... The solution to ALL our problems... Has been in the Battletech source all along. It is a simple thing called a Targeting Computer. The rules read something like this:



Further, they continue with the most important part:



Now, what that means, for example is, say, you have a 2x PPC, 2x ERPPC Stalker. That's 28 tons of equipment. So per the rules, the Targeting Computer (and components) would weigh 7 tons and take up 7 crits !!!!!!

That right there... That is a HUGE penalty. You want pinpoint aim? Great! You have to pay for it... bigtime. The Targeting Computer was not only the computer itself, but included things like servos and actuators to move and align the weapons.

I'm not sure but some things I've read said this tech wasn't available to the IS until 3062. Either way, THIS NEEDS TO BE REPRESENTED in this game. It'd go a LOOOOONG way towards fixing this broken game.

No Targeting Computer... Tough! No pinpoint convergence! You want it... pay for it.

Case closed. PGI just needs to stick to the rules and implement them as they were written for some things. By not doing so, they end up breaking the game and then putting convoluted, obfuscated systems that make no sense and don't work better than breaking the game worse than it already is.

Vote for the Targeting Computer... Today!

Edit: I am NO WAY endorsing a Cone of Fire. Not one bit. Don't even think of accusing me of doing so. Cones of fire SUCK!

No Targeting Computer--weapons shoot straight ahead. No convergence at all. They shoot straight ahead and you can still hit what you're aiming at if you know their relative impact point--which is consistent barring terrain changes/movement changes to your mech's position on the X/Y/Z axes.

That is totally off topic. That has nothing to do with the latest patch. More over it isn't all that great of an idea, and targeting computers are out of the timeline.

[Mister Blastman]

Belorion, on 31 July 2013 - 07:28 AM, said:

That is totally off topic. That has nothing to do with the latest patch. More over it isn't all that great of an idea, and targeting computers are out of the timeline.

Not at all. It has EVERYTHING to do with the latest patch, Mr. HJ (Where's Lynxcat? I need to shoot at him). It is a superior solution to the convoluted heat penalty system.

[Apnu]

Skyfaller, on 30 July 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

2 lrm 15s is not a boat.

A stalker with 2 LRM15s and 2 LRM10s (or 4 15s or 1 20, 1 15 and 2 10s) is an LRM boat.

The problem with this change is that it EFFECTIVELY removes LRM support mechs from the equation. A CatA1 cannot now equip a full LRM load because it will get insane heat penalty.

For a weapon that has a 10+ second warning, takes 10 seconds to hit at max range, is highly visible in the air AND requires not only a lot of tonnage crit slots... and which REQUIRES additional purchase of upgrades AND modules to even become effective at dealing damage ... giving it a heat penalty is just... IDIOTIC.

Chain firing LRMs only makes them be chewed up by AMS. I know from tests that a quad lrm15 is stopped in FULL if chain fired and just two ams are chewing at it. What other weapon can be countered from start to finish like this? NONE.

The LRM heat penalty needs to be removed.

I disagree. My LRM hunch is balanced and I do fine in the games I play with it. I don't call it a boat, yes, because its balanced. Which is why I put "boat" in quotes to be sarcastic. I contribute about 200-300 pts of damage and get the occasional kill. I'm asset to my team and I know the role I play. And when I run out of ammo, I move in and brawl or cap with what's left of my mech.

Why do you need to pack an LRM60 or LRM70? You aren't going to win the game alone, ever, so why over-commit your mech to one weapon system? You'll save yourself a ton of grief in upgrades and cost and crits and ammo plus the heat. Yes, I know the Cat A1 is missile only, that's an exception, not the rule all other missile boating mechs can have backup weapon systems. Which is why I don't like the A1. However, you know what I've been seeing on the Cat A1 since heat scaling went in? Balance. I've been seeing two LRM15 or LRM20 with some set of SRMs. Which is bad for me when I'm playing in my HBK-4P because I liked to flank around to LRM boats, get within 190m and eat them up. If I saw a Cat A1, I made a bee-line and knew I'd get a kill with almost no damage. Now that party is over, PGI has taken away my favorite target.

Am I crying about it or calling it "insane" because PGI took away my favorite target? No. I'm not so melodramatic. In fact I celebrate it. I have to adapt and elevate my game to the new threat. That's fun! Thanks PGI!

Also, 10 second warning? What? That's true if you're firing at the extreme range of the LRM. If your within 500m or less the travel time is a few seconds, nor does the arc go as high, so I don't agree with your notion that LRMs have such limitations already. My advice, get within 300-500m of your target, wait for your lance mates to get a good lock on the guy then launch your LRMs. You'll find them very effective.

I'm glad chain firing is easily mitigated by AMS. Spamming LRMs like that isn't optimal, IMO. I saw two cheesy stalkers a few nights ago with, I think 5 LRM5s and they were chain firing them on a spider on River City. I've never seen spamming of LRMs like that! I was there with my 2xLRM15 Hunch and just watched the steady stream of missiles (there was another spider on our team tagging the first spider so we all had constant and juicy missile locks) and between the two they couldn't bring down the spider. The target, smartly, got into the buildings and dueled the spider that was TAG'ing him. I brought the guy down when he wandered into open ground in two salvos. It was ridiculous, and later in the match the two Stalkers had no ammo left and were useless milling about in lower city waiting to die. Those were bad builds and they made a bad decision to spam LRMs on a spider who had cover, but I'm not judging, if players want to field builds like that, be my guest.

Which brings me to my next point, we're talking about a little heat penalty, If you want to pack a LRM70 Cat A1 and alpha all that, then you take the risk of the heat. You have to factor that into your game play. Adapt, man. Fire one LRM20 with an LRM15, wait a few seconds, fire the next set. You'll probably save on ammo doing it that way because you'll probably lose lock as the player goes into cover or your forward team mate is too dense to hit 'r' and lock on to the target. And you'll likely have more missiles for the mid-to-end game of the match. And at that point, your team mates will love you. Its win-win, just takes a small adaption on your part.

[POWR]

I don't get what all the crying is about. I just don't get it. Maybe it's because I build mechs I have fun with, that have varied setups that still work. Instead of sit and spend 8 hours a day playing this game in mechs with as many boated weapons as possible... stop taking this so seriously, you'll feel much better if you don't. Also, don't spend thousands of dollars on it. It's a videogame. It could go away tomorrow. Don't be a whale.

[Eroglik]

So I didn't quite like the Hunchback with all those ML's, so for sh*ts and giggles I stripped off all the armour and filled it with LL instead based on an old build someone suggested.

I saw them firing an alpha and hitting the heat limit but not enough for shut down, when I tried it in practice I shut down, I'm assuming due to whatever the recent bonus heat was added in later patches (I'm fairly new to MWO). I just salvo them now.

So after this patch will my Hunchback LL build be generating anymore heat than it already does? Sorry if I didn't understand the patchnotes correctly, just curious.