4 replies to this topic

[Jack Lowe]

This thread is actually two posts. I was encouraged to make a thread from them. Together they are rather long so I will attempt to summarize them at the bottom to prevent people from reading a wall of text. I'll also annotate them Part 1 and 2 and reference them to allow a person to read only the relevant post of interest.


Part 1

I do tend to agree with the OP, there is a bit too much of a gap between lights and heavies/assaults and mediums don't really fill it well. Some tweeks to overall agility are probably in order although I don't think this is the whole problem. I think to see the whole problem we have to look at how mediums are generally used in the game as well as what roles are currently available to them at this time. We also need to examine environmental issues.

I'll get quickly get to what I'm meaning. Until the Victor I piloted centurions almost exclusively, and probably will again as soon as I get the Victors mastered. I noticed I tended to do fairly well so long as I could remain mobile, very well as long I picked my spots and didn't attract to much attention. This was solo dropping with PUG's. If I got caught flat footed or was forced to fight a more static type of engagement then I didn't tend to do so well.

The last week or two I started dropping with a four man again. They had a couple of light pilots and a fast heavy. We were dropping conquest exclusively a couple of nights. I got curious, and itchy, and decided to take my Wang for a spin. It worked very well, for the most part but a couple things stood out. First our strategy was mainly to send the lights ahead and cap the fringes as well as scout. If they found something we could ambush and take out they would harass/delay and generally occupy them while I and the heavy moved up. We were both fast enough to offer quick support so the lights didn't need to take heavy damage before help arrived. When it did they would keep the enemy from disengaging and us hitting them hard and usually by surprise took them down amazingly fast. Also the lights allowed us to choose our battles. If they found the main body we were far enough out to avoid them the lights were fast enough to disengage. However again if we were forced to try a stand up fight it didn't always go so well.

I also noticed that although this would work on larger maps very well, on smaller ones it was much more dicey, we just didn't have the room we needed to get enough separation in the enemy easily. On conquest also the results were much more mixed. Which leads me to believe that the limitations of the game modes and maps have more to do with the problem than just the raw comparisons of how one mech matches up to another in a arena type fight. Although that is an important consideration. I think that not examining the potential ways a mech can be used in the game, and comparing it to how people are trying to use them will lead to mistakes in buffing/nerfing mech capabilities that will cause potentially serious balance issues down the road. I also think that although some adjustments should be made, more effort should be put into creating environments and combat objectives that are allow the mediums and lights, to a lesser extent, shine. Give them uses to which they are obviously best suited and they will be used.


Part 2

I didn't want to put up too much of a wall so I broke this up a bit. I think that game modes and objectives are what could use a bit of balancing to make them more multi class friendly. Conquest mode, although it needs to be refined, is a pretty good place to start. I will propose two general ideas for different modes to give u an idea of what I mean.

Now granted these are just hashed out of my brain, and admittedly not perfect, nor balanced by play testing. First up would be to alter a bit where the capture points for conquest are on the map. Put three at different points with a bit of distance between them but generally they should be confined to one third of a map. The other two or perhaps add a third should be confined to the opposite one third. One side is capture objective points, the other extraction points. The mission is a raid, the attacker has to raid one objective point for a certain number of resource points, but only one point of the three are viable. Also only the attacker knows which one of those points is live. After getting those points they must extract, again only one extraction point is live only the attacker knows which one. The defender is tasked with protecting their resources or preventing the escape of the raiders. If needed a condition could also be put in where a certain number of the raiders must survive to gain the full mission bonus, this would encourage the attacker to preserve their forces to a certain degree.

Second is a recon in force, map is laid out basically the same way as above. Now the attacker is tasked with scouting the objectives as their primary, secondary is to scout the enemy forces on planet, other conditions could be added to encourage some combat as needed, but again extraction is required. Enemy force has to prevent their objectives from being fully scouted. Prevent their forces from being fully scouted. Destroy the enemy force or prevent it's extraction.


The two modes could also be linked together to go along with the choose four mechs type lobby system coming up. One thing that is important to note is that map size for both of those mode types does matter unfortunately. If the defender is able to shift the bulk of their force from point to point to quickly particularly if very heavy assets can get from point to point to quickly the attacker is screwed. There would again be no reason to bring anything but assault mechs. No reason to diversify rather defeats the purpose. I do think however that this post does give a fairly decent example of how creating a need for diversity on the battlefield can help encourage, well diversity on the battlefield. Particularly if taken with my earlier post a raiding force of lights with some fast medium and heavy mechs should be ideal for the parameters laid out, I think.

Well let me know what u think.


Part 1 indicates the need to make some adjustments to medium mechs. to further separate them from heavies. It limits this to a degree to prevent them from creating to much of a grey area between the medium and light class. It also limits these changes due to other considerations. These are, the way players are currently using mechs in general, or thinking about the game at this time, the limits the current game modes and map sizes can have on the target mech classes in relation to their inherent abilities. It also gives an example of how under specific game conditions they can be highly effective. Provided they don't stray to far from the intended tactical role.

Part 2 goes further into this idea, and provides examples of possible mission types(game modes) that allow mediums and lights an expanded role. By changing the mission objectives we promote a more mobile form of warfare as apposed to static. Again map size can limit the advantage of speed and mobility and is noted.

By thinking of the different game modes in more of a military way we come up with missions types. Using this along with the upcoming CW would mean the ability for a unit to choose the type of mission they wish to undertake. Preventing those that prefer more of a straight up brawling type of engagement or more static warfare from being forced to participate in something they find not fun. This would be those who hate those base cappers. Those that prefer a more mobile chess match with it's attendant element of deception, and ambush can be tasked with those missions that more suit their taste. If a player or team should get bored with constant assault they can always take on a recon mission for a change of pace or just to practice to sharpen certain skills.

Changing the characteristics of medium mechs is a short term fix. Modes or mission types a longer term goal. I include both because we will need both eventually. Also it's only two modes mentioned they focus on more mobile elements. More modes will need to be added that have more balanced parameters. However if we have something that encompasses closer to the outer limits we can then begin to work on things that tend toward the middle, and do so more easily I believe.

[James The Fox Dixon]

I really like how you described our drops and tactics. I also like the ideas you have for new game modes. I hope PGI reads this and takes inspiration from you on new game modes.

[EmperorMyrf]

I like the general idea of having non-pure-combat missions, though an effort will need to be made to keep it fun. If it's not fun and people can choose mission types, then this mission type will be avoided and all this effort will be for naught.

Though as you mentioned, integrating these sort of mission types with CW would be great. I'd love to see some sort of "rolling campaign" against a disputed planet. Using a general sort of 'Recon Mission->Asset/Resource Raid Mission->Base Attack Mission' flow with the outcomes of the previous missions determining the advantages or disadvantages of the next mission. Not only could drop weights and company size be determined on a per-mission-type basis (dependent on both mission type and outcome of previous missions), but also the missions themselves will be tailored to specific weight classes of mechs, so as to include everyone equally.

Great post.

[Jack Lowe]

EmperorMyrf, on 30 July 2013 - 02:07 PM, said:

I like the general idea of having non-pure-combat missions, though an effort will need to be made to keep it fun. If it's not fun and people can choose mission types, then this mission type will be avoided and all this effort will be for naught.

Though as you mentioned, integrating these sort of mission types with CW would be great. I'd love to see some sort of "rolling campaign" against a disputed planet. Using a general sort of 'Recon Mission->Asset/Resource Raid Mission->Base Attack Mission' flow with the outcomes of the previous missions determining the advantages or disadvantages of the next mission. Not only could drop weights and company size be determined on a per-mission-type basis (dependent on both mission type and outcome of previous missions), but also the missions themselves will be tailored to specific weight classes of mechs, so as to include everyone equally.

Great post.

I tried to clearly communicate the ideas, but also to relate them in a general way to hopefully promote discussion and improvements. Mainly it was to address what you mention I didn't want to be to rigid for fear of removing the use of heavier mechs altogether in an effort to flesh out the lighter variants and to prevent them from being to niche. Meaning only appealing to a very small player base. Those two things I want to avoid most. Maintaining both the use of all classes as well as an appeal to a variety of playing styles is how I envisioned the raid mission. I may have been a tad to general but didn't want trilogy novel, it's already a book. The recon is probably more toward the extreme meaning it will probably appeal to a narrower play style, without some revision. At the time I was looking more to further flesh out the main idea, as well as show that greater tonnage doesn't always mean greater chances of winning. In some situations greater tonnage can be a disadvantage. Thank you for your reply and your support. Any thoughts you have are welcome.

Edited by Jack Lowe, 30 July 2013 - 02:59 PM.

[danneskold]

I want to play mediums, but I have a very hard time doing it anymore.

The problem is speed. or lack there of. Profile hurts - a lot - too. But bottom line, they are not fast enough to be useful.

I did a comparison.

Avg speed of:
L) 147
M)115
H)94
A)70

I then realized that speedy versions in the classes were enhancing the average, so I took them out (cicada and QD for example)
M) 105 (no cicada)
H) 85 (no dragon or QD)
A) 67 (no Victor)

Note that barring 2 models of raven, all lights go 150+ kph (with tweak).

That means that all mediums other than cicada on average, are 41 kph slower than the lights, but only 20 kph faster than most heavies - and it should be noted that only the cicada, 1 model of cent, and all models of treb are faster than the fast heavies (fast heavies being dragon and QD) (cent 9d maxes at 139, all trebs can do 116, with the 3c at 139). So the data is pulled up a bit by those classes.

The problem is that most medium chassis are considerably slower than the lights, and not much faster, or even slower - than the heavies.

The mediums need to be faster - the data here does not take into account what a medium has to give up in terms of firepower as well to go to these maxed out speeds. Given profile size, and engine weight, etc, a medium going to max speed has less firepower than say - a jenner F, and cannot match up with a fast heavy.

The mediums need speed - to some degree - so survive, just like a light. No one wants to see mediums as fast or hard to hit as a light - that would end the lights, but they need to be faster, with more of the frames maxing out in the 120-130 kph range, and without having to give up significant firepower. If they can do that, they can become the backbone of armies - but right now, they cannot. They have too little armor, and not enough speed to compensate.

The lights, as a class, go 150, almost to a model. It is what they do - and some have good firepower, and JJ to boot.

Heavies almost all have good armor and firepower, but are generally slower - even the fastest models being nearly 50kph slower than the lights.

Mediums need a simliar platform to make them work - they need to have a basis where they are in general much faster than the heavies, that 120-130 range I indicate. Then, they can at least drive off the lights, and really act to protect the heavies, give good firepower - really be the jack of all trades a medium should be.

The present speed of the medium is too close to that of the heavies, along with a large profile, reduced armor and lesser firepower (compounded by giving up engine to get more firepower - which just slows them further to the range of the heavies) to be viable in very competitive play.

Edited by danneskold, 02 August 2013 - 02:31 PM.