156 replies to this topic

[TehSBGX]

Hardpoint sizes would be far less confusing than ghost heat and would accomplish the goal in far less arbitrary and confusing manner. But we're so close to launch I don't see it happening. It's a shame too, since I can live with hardpoint restrictions but ghost heat bothers me due to arbitrary and confusing it is which many people would prolly agree with.

[mania3c]

TehSBGX, on 31 July 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:

Hardpoint sizes would be far less confusing than ghost heat and would accomplish the goal in far less arbitrary and confusing manner. But we're so close to launch I don't see it happening. It's a shame too, since I can live with hardpoint restrictions but ghost heat bothers me due to arbitrary and confusing it is which many people would prolly agree with.

but hard point size system and heat penalty are different system with different goals.. heat penalty was never intended to limit customization/diversificate mechs...it's trying to shift meta from less alpha striking with one weapon type in general..but DO NOT reduce customization or boating.. hard point size system is directly aiming to reduce customization and control boating and mech role..

[Khobai]

Heat penalty doesnt shift the meta from alphastriking though. Look at all the weapons it penalizes. Theyre all hitscan and spread weapons. If anything the heat penalties for boating makes PPCs even more dominant by killing any competition it had.

[mania3c]

Khobai, on 31 July 2013 - 02:13 PM, said:

Heat penalty doesnt shift the meta from alphastriking though. Look at all the weapons it penalizes. Theyre all hitscan and spread weapons. If anything the heat penalties for boating makes PPCs even more dominant by killing any competition it had.

c'mon..I am here non-stop for almost year already.. game changed a lot since heat scaling was introduced.. I was cored frequently before with 4-6 PPC (or even large lasers)..these days?? I can't remember one situation where I didn't have chance to fight back ..Heat scale is not my favorite system at all..yet..it's working pretty good ...

[Khobai]

Quote

c'mon..I am here non-stop for almost year already.. game changed a lot since heat scaling was introduced.. I was cored frequently before with 4-6 PPC (or even large lasers)..these days?? I can't remember one situation where I didn't have chance to fight back ..Heat scale is not my favorite system at all..yet..it's working pretty good ...

No it isnt. I run my x2 ERPPC/Gauss/Large Laser Highlander and its business as usual coring people in seconds.

[nitra]

NO.. The hard point system is restricted enough as it is .

there should be a stock only mode to this game to satisfy those who want to play role based mechs.

there is a game here for those of us who like to tinker and build platforms of destruction . unfortunately the other player base, wants every mech to have have a similar dps model within a minuscule percentage of each other. Because this is what more restrictive hard points boil down to. its players wanting to play on a battlefield of equals so their individual skill can shine through.
which is fine in and of its self, but it cannot coexist with a limited hard point system as you will always have people bemoaning the next creative build that appears to be op. that is why a stock only mode with tonnage restriction should have / be implemented so you can go do glorious battle with like minded others on a feild of equals.

those of us who enjoy the diversity and problem solving of trying to take out 6ppc stalkers or dueling twin ppc gauss highlanders are then left with another generic fps shooter skinned in mechs clothing .
Customization allows for diversification, in overall game play and perceived enjoyment of the game.

simplification is not the answer . we have been down the road of simplification many times before . it does not work.
the only answer is stock builds only. (yes stock only and it would be fun )

as you cannot have both . what pgi has done here is the best compromise yet .
it being a compromise it will have flaws . introduce players into the mix and you will have some builds that are a problem but as long as the system is not open and diversified a build will pop up that nullifies it. this is called adapt or die.
some however choose to cry rather than adapt.

Edited by nitra, 31 July 2013 - 03:08 PM.

[mania3c]

Khobai, on 31 July 2013 - 02:27 PM, said:

No it isnt. I run my x2 ERPPC/Gauss/Large Laser Highlander and its business as usual coring people in seconds.

Your build is not something to be afraid of..it could be good and you could have good score with it..if it's true..you are a good pilot and you deserve it.. but it's nothing compared to 4-6 PPC builds ..or even one trick pony AC40 jaggers..

[FupDup]

mania3c, on 31 July 2013 - 03:44 PM, said:

Your build is not something to be afraid of..it could be good and you could have good score with it..if it's true..you are a good pilot and you deserve it.. but it's nothing compared to 4-6 PPC builds ..or even one trick pony AC40 jaggers..

Builds with 5 or 6 PPCs were garbage even before ghost heat because they had to wait too long between alphas compared to 4 PPC/ 2 PPC + 2 ERPPC versions (also, they had to use a tiny engine or XL). Jagerbombs had the weakness of being relatively short ranged and having a fragile XL engine.

[skullman86]

mania3c, on 31 July 2013 - 02:11 PM, said:

but hard point size system and heat penalty are different system with different goals.. heat penalty was never intended to limit customization/diversificate mechs...it's trying to shift meta from less alpha striking with one weapon type in general..but DO NOT reduce customization or boating.. hard point size system is directly aiming to reduce customization and control boating and mech role..

A feature's "intended" role doesn't really mean much; what matters is what it actually does when it's implemented. A hardpoint size system's intended role is not really to balance alpha strikes etc., but by limiting the customization of certain variants to get better mech variety, you may end up killing a lot of the flavor of the month builds, forcing people to look at less desirable variants (again, the Awesome vs stalker example). Ghost heat wasn't introduced to put a hard limit on customization (not its intended role), but the effects of it don't really show a customization friendly system. Loadouts that were overused a few weeks ago have been abandoned and players have managed to find other "optimal" builds that aren't penalized.

Hardpoint sizes would be decided by the stock loadouts and the mech's "out of the box" role. Ghost heat is based on an individual's gut feelings about how many weapons can be fired before you pop. One of these is an unchanging, and predictable set of numbers (for the most part) while the other can be changed on a whim with nothing in place to predict future changes.

Basically, what this all boils down to is PGI penalizing "creativity" when their system is to blame for letting people do it in the first place. They cannot have their cake and eat it too (flexibility without cheese); smarter, more experienced players will always find and exploit the loop holes in these convoluted systems, and the people that suffer will be the ones who do not understand or know about the systems...it's been happening since closed beta.

[Joseph Mallan]

mania3c, on 31 July 2013 - 03:44 PM, said:

Your build is not something to be afraid of..it could be good and you could have good score with it..if it's true..you are a good pilot and you deserve it.. but it's nothing compared to 4-6 PPC builds ..or even one trick pony AC40 jaggers..

I don't see double AC20s as a problem. They have short range. they are hitting with the force f one AC20 on TT an should be respected and out range as much as possible. If shooting 2 AC20 generates +24 heat why doesn't a Ultra5? It is shooting at double the rate of fire. Penalizing 2 of an AC is dumb. And PGI should feel ashamed for this.

[Sybreed]

Joseph Mallan, on 31 July 2013 - 03:59 PM, said:

I don't see double AC20s as a problem. They have short range. they are hitting with the force f one AC20 on TT an should be respected and out range as much as possible. If shooting 2 AC20 generates +24 heat why doesn't a Ultra5? It is shooting at double the rate of fire. Penalizing 2 of an AC is dumb. And PGI should feel ashamed for this.

the difference here vs TT is that in TT your 2-3 AC/20 shots might never hit the same spot twice, while in MWO the 4-6 AC/20 shots will aways hit the same spot if the shooter is patient enough, resulting in a CT very quickly cored. In TT you might have lost an arm and leg, but you're still able to fight.

Edited by Sybreed, 31 July 2013 - 04:02 PM.

[Roland]

nitra, on 31 July 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:

those of us who enjoy the diversity and problem solving of trying to take out 6ppc stalkers or dueling twin ppc gauss highlanders are then left with another generic fps shooter skinned in mechs clothing .
Customization allows for diversification, in overall game play and perceived enjoyment of the game.

I think that if you step back and look at the current state of things, you'll find that there is very little diversification in the game.

Generally, throughout beta, there have always been a handful of mech variants which combine the best hardpoints for a given role, with the best geometry. These mechs will then tend to be the majority of what you see on the field.

Hell, at one point, you could essentially evaluate a mech purely upon how many SRM hardpoints it had.

Then, what has happened, is that as other variants showed up with the same hardpoints, if their geometry was better, they just took over that role and banished the previous variant to obsolescence.

All I ask is that you step back a bit, and put aside the initial instinct to assume reduction of customization is automatically bad. As I mentioned, I previously believed exactly the same thing. I know where you are coming from.

But note the fairly limited degree of variety in the game currently.

Further, look at the system that was used in Mechwarrior 4. There were still quite a wide variety of mechs that were fielded, despite the fact that hardpoints where limited in size. The size limitations did not result in variants only being able to run one good configuration.

[Sybreed]

And let's not forget that the different systems proposed are only inspired from MW4, they're not the exact same things. We want to avoid the mistakes MW4's system brought to configs and mech variety, which resulted in too many small energy boats.

[Roland]

Sybreed, on 31 July 2013 - 04:08 PM, said:

And let's not forget that the different systems proposed are only inspired from MW4, they're not the exact same things. We want to avoid the mistakes MW4's system brought to configs and mech variety, which resulted in too many small energy boats.

Yes, well MWO's system, blended with MW4's system, would likely create a system where customization was possible, while avoiding various issues of prior games.

Although I would point out that MW4 never really had a problem with small weapon boats, mainly because all of the small weapons had been nerfed into uselessness.

[mania3c]

FupDup, on 31 July 2013 - 03:47 PM, said:

Builds with 5 or 6 PPCs were garbage even before ghost heat because they had to wait too long between alphas compared to 4 PPC/ 2 PPC + 2 ERPPC versions (also, they had to use a tiny engine or XL). Jagerbombs had the weakness of being relatively short ranged and having a fragile XL engine.

It's true..but fact is..they really needed just few lucky shots..nothing more ..nothing less... even completely noob could pull out big numbers with these builds.. it was just that easy..yes.. there were ways to deal with them easily ..but mostly..in live environment and average ELO players..it just wasn't possible..

I really feel game improved ..while new challenges and issues are in front of us..and devs.. I am really enjoying game much more..

Quote

I don't see double AC20s as a problem. They have short range. they are hitting with the force f one AC20 on TT an should be respected and out range as much as possible. If shooting 2 AC20 generates +24 heat why doesn't a Ultra5? It is shooting at double the rate of fire. Penalizing 2 of an AC is dumb. And PGI should feel ashamed for this.

You may don't see..Even I had no problems with AC40 jagers or pults..but many players had..Still not sure if penalizing AC20 was good way to go.. but AC40 jaggers are almost gone.. for better or worse..

Edited by mania3c, 31 July 2013 - 04:14 PM.

[Sybreed]

Roland, on 31 July 2013 - 04:10 PM, said:

Yes, well MWO's system, blended with MW4's system, would likely create a system where customization was possible, while avoiding various issues of prior games.

Although I would point out that MW4 never really had a problem with small weapon boats, mainly because all of the small weapons had been nerfed into uselessness.

true, I don't remember so well how it played out. I think a system à la MW:T mixed with MWO's actual system would be the best.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sybreed, on 31 July 2013 - 04:02 PM, said:

the difference here vs TT is that in TT your 2-3 AC/20 shots might never hit the same spot twice, while in MWO the 4-6 AC/20 shots will aways hit the same spot if the shooter is patient enough, resulting in a CT very quickly cored. In TT you might have lost an arm and leg, but you're still able to fight.

Then the problem isn't 2-3 AC20! Its convergence. a single TT AC20 to a Jenners leg fully armored, destroyed the whole leg and some side armor, so I for one am not against two weapons being able to converge... after all a Ten turn match is less than 2 minutes of combat. Even if it took 6-7 hours to play out.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 31 July 2013 - 04:15 PM.

[Sybreed]

Joseph Mallan, on 31 July 2013 - 04:14 PM, said:

Then the problem isn't 2-3 AC20! Its convergence. a single TT AC20 to a Jenners leg fully armored, destroyed the whole leg and some side armor, so I for one am not against two weapons being able to converge... after all a Ten turn match is less than 2 minutes of combat. Even if it took 6-7 hours to play out.

oh, I've always said convergence is a problem. But, PGI aren't very likely to look into that (complexity with HSR, lag,etc), which is why hardpoint sizes might not entirely fix the issue (canon boats would still benefit too much from convergence), but it'd improve the gameplay in giving mechs more character and limiting high alpha strikes. They could even get rid of heat penalties.

Choosing a specific mech and variant should be a thoughtful process, not just a "eh, this one is slimmer than the other and has more energy hardpoints, so I'll use that one instead".

But, agreed with convergence being an issue (I even said it in my OP )

Edited by Sybreed, 31 July 2013 - 04:24 PM.

[Kaspirikay]

Sup nubs, 3k games pugger here so listen up.



hi

[Jesus Box]

TehSBGX, on 31 July 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:

Hardpoint sizes would be far less confusing than ghost heat and would accomplish the goal in far less arbitrary and confusing manner. But we're so close to launch I don't see it happening. It's a shame too, since I can live with hardpoint restrictions but ghost heat bothers me due to arbitrary and confusing it is which many people would prolly agree with.

The game already launched last Fall. They can put a beta sticker on it all they want, but that doesn't magically mean it isn't a released product yet. The funny thing is that they're selling a second preorder package as they plan to launch it again under the guise that the first one didn't happen.