42 replies to this topic

[Storm Fox]

I am one of the folks who have forked out a lot of cash hoping this game would be more then a sub-par team shooter in mechs. As it stands now, I am done giving PGI any more money.

The way the game plays now it is nearly I find it hard to believe that the Houses would ever bother spending millions of c-bills on a warmachine that lasts all of 6-10 seconds in 1 vs 1 combat, and should you survive that 1 on 1, you are highly unlikely to survive a second combat.

I played the original table top Battletech, and I feel 100% that the randomized hit locations were part of what made the game great. A mech could get lucky and survive through several skirmishes with luck. In MWO its totally become a game of quick coring and speed kills. This is NOT fun overall. It LOOKS like Battletech, which is awesome!!! Sadly, it has not even come close to FEELING like Battletech, and this is what we BT fans are looking for here.

PGI, take a cue from World of Tanks.... they too went through a period on their beta where most Tanks could get 3 shotted and be knocked out of action in seconds. The WoT dev's wisely decided, that people play a game to have FUN, and dieing in 6 seconds of combat is not fun. So they made the tanks more durable, to give players more PLAY time per match. Seriously consider making mechs more durable! This will gives player a chance to learn and adapt to the battle they are in. More time IN battle is MORE fun, this equals MORE players spending MORE money.

[Storm Fox]

Thunderklaws, on 09 August 2013 - 04:57 PM, said:

Given that nearly everything here IS inspired from that game...
Aldo; the day I fire a Gauss at a mech and get a "PRRRRAAANG!! Damn the shot didnt penetrate" Im out

I agree it IS inspired by Battletech, and I did state the games LOOK is awesome and true to Battletech.

But in your case, you sound like a sniper, so you are just fine with knocking out a 5 million C-bill warmachine with 3 $200 gauss bullets. That is totally my point, no one would bother with mech warfare in this case. It'd be Tribes.....

Edited by Storm Fox, 09 August 2013 - 05:14 PM.

[Hauser]

Thunderklaws, on 09 August 2013 - 04:57 PM, said:

Given that nearly everything here IS inspired from that game...
Aldo; the day I fire a Gauss at a mech and get a "PRRRRAAANG!! Damn the shot didnt penetrate" Im out

Every time a hit doesn't register that is exactly what I'm thinking.

[Storm Fox]

Hauser, on 09 August 2013 - 05:13 PM, said:

Every time a hit doesn't register that is exactly what I'm thinking.

Really you guys, they dont have to use THAT particular mechanic to make mech armor more durable. I agree with you they should not use that mechanic.

In that vein however, it WOULD make sense to use angle of attack to see if some an attacks force is deflected by your armor. Not totally negated, mind you, but it is an idea.

Edited by Storm Fox, 09 August 2013 - 05:17 PM.

[Splitpin]

Well I'm also a founder and while I share your frustration and have also stopped paying for premium time it's for totally different reasons. Chief among those reasons is hit registration. It frustrates me hugely to aim at CT, see it hit a foot, then (if I'm lucky) see an arm blow off. This is MechWarrior on-line, not BattleTech on line. If I have the time and skill (and I don't have lot of that in all honesty) to aim at a particular location I believe I should have a fair expectation to hit that location. Dice roll for hit location, no, why aim at all ? BattleTech by it's nature has no way to replicate aim/timing/skill why should MechWarrior be limited in those just because Battletech is ? You bring up WoT (a truly good game IMHO) but you'd be wrong in assuming aiming and/or skill isn't rewarded, every tank has it's weak spots, kills can be quicker than here for that matter.

[Splitpin]

Storm Fox, on 09 August 2013 - 05:15 PM, said:

In that vein however, it WOULD make sense to use angle of attack to see if some an attacks force is deflected by your armor. Not totally negated, mind you, but it is an idea.

I'd be fine with that too. More 'real' physics would be a great thing, we'd have to get rid of machine guns actually penetrating this armour though, which I'd also cheer about.

[Storm Fox]

Splitpin, on 09 August 2013 - 05:25 PM, said:

I'd be fine with that too. More 'real' physics would be a great thing, we'd have to get rid of machine guns actually penetrating this armour though, which I'd also cheer about.

Same feelings. I just can not wrap my head around how quick a mech can be cored with relatively little damage. Who would design and field such a pathetic weapon of war, let alone try to pilot one

[Sephlock]

Storm Fox, on 09 August 2013 - 05:12 PM, said:

I agree it IS inspired by Battletech, and I did state the games LOOK is awesome and true to Battletech.

But in your case, you sound like a sniper, so you are just fine with knocking out a 5 million C-bill warmachine with 3 $200 gauss bullets. That is totally my point, no one would bother with mech warfare in this case. It'd be Tribes.....

THIS GAME DESPERATELY NEEDS SKIING! ALPINE PRACTICALLY SCREAMS FOR IT!

[Dracol]

Mechwarrior video games have had more players then the tt battletech game.

Sound business choice to go after the larger, more established market.

Storm Fox, on 09 August 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

Same feelings. I just can not wrap my head around how quick a mech can be cored with relatively little damage. Who would design and field such a pathetic weapon of war, let alone try to pilot one

And take the next logical step, why build a towering mech instead of a low profile tank?

[MaddMaxx]

Storm Fox, on 09 August 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

Same feelings. I just can not wrap my head around how quick a mech can be cored with relatively little damage. Who would design and field such a pathetic weapon of war, let alone try to pilot one

Do you know how many "pathetic weapons of war" were destroyed in WW2? They were called Tanks and they were "the best tech" either side could muster. So many One shots. One kill. Brutal eh!

So, ask yourself, why did they even bother to continue to build them, after seeing the reality of what pathetic war machines they really were. Hmmm.

P.S.

Quote

• Soviet Union: Between 96,500 to 100,000 tanks
  
• UK : Around 20,000 tanks
  
• USA: Around 20,000 tanks

• Germany: Around 45,000 to 50,000 tanks
  
• Italy: Around 3500 tanks
  
• Japan:Around 3000 tanks

Edited by MaddMaxx, 13 August 2013 - 10:24 AM.

[wolfmanjake]

Sephlock, on 09 August 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:

THIS GAME DESPERATELY NEEDS SKIING! ALPINE PRACTICALLY SCREAMS FOR IT!

I would totally pay MC for Mech ski's. And the Ski-free yeti bobble head.

[General Taskeen]

Thunderklaws, on 09 August 2013 - 04:57 PM, said:

Given that nearly everything here IS inspired from that game...
Aldo; the day I fire a Gauss at a mech and get a "PRRRRAAANG!! Damn the shot didnt penetrate" Im out

I think your assumption is going a little too far (obviously). No way will a weapon not do its intended damage, since the game is based on taking damage values from Battle Tech itself. That is a non-worry trust me. WOT is simply based around semi-reality where in WW2 newer and better Tanks were engineered with thicker or sloped armor and thus shells really did bounce off or shatter when hitting certain spots. In BT, every thing from a Mech MG to a Gauss does damage to Vehicle, Mech, and Aerospace armor regardless, but is dependent on range or in the case of the original board game, random chance.

Most people probably don't realize it, but PGI's original MW5 concept was a lot more sim like with a concept for the targeting computer which clearly showed the weapons not always hitting the exact spot they were aiming.



The publishers likely figured something that was more sim like wouldn't sell as well.

[Sephlock]

" No way will a weapon not do its intended damage, since the game is based on taking damage values from Battle Tech itself." you mean like Machineguns were for the longest time?

[orcrist86]

Armor values have already been doubled. Battletech runs under several sets of rules depending on which side of the universe you inhabit. There's the solaris ruleset, there's the mechwarrior rpg ruleset and tabletop ruleset. Hell there's even a ruleset just for space combat (aerotech). A typical boardgame engagement only lasted a few brief minutes, just like our current games. The difference is we get to shoot more. It may seem counter intuitive, but this is actually a very good compromise between play-ability and faithfulness to the lore. Some of the things that get people all riled up right now don't bother me much, mostly because I see this as a slow balancing act and the rejuvenation of something I once thought lost.

Now if the devs can bring in hand to hand combat from the TT, I'll start kicking all those light mechs swarming my feet.

[Splitpin]

orcrist86, on 13 August 2013 - 03:17 PM, said:

Now if the devs can bring in hand to hand combat from the TT, I'll start kicking all those light mechs swarming my feet.

Oh yes ... but the Spider latched to your back may still be an issue. Rogue Spider Backstab

[Sephlock]

Didn't they buff SRMs ?

[Malleus011]

It does seem as if the game is moving further and further away from the user base's experience with the Battletech property. The stock Awesome has a hidden heat penalty. The stock Catapult A1 cannot deal any damage under 180 meters. While these mechs, as stock, are not optimal, they are currently deathtraps for rookie pilots.

Worse, they're depriving themselves of a number of mech designs due to the changes moving away from canon. A Panther or Urbanmech - a slow light - will be dead meat upon introduction. (I would buy one of each and suffer, of course) Three variants to master brings its own limitations.

I don't see why a simple system - to steal from a number of other shooting games (Mass Effect, COD, etc) - that makes the targeting reticle expand to show the possible hit area of weapons fire affected by movement, heat, and jumping. The faster you move, the more you overheat or jump the less accurate you are. This kind of scatter would prevent running and jumping mechs from dealing pinpoint damage (because not every weapon lands on the same spot), brings in something like the TT randomization. Walking and stationary mechs would be easier to hit. Pinpoint damage would be more rare.

Granted, that's probably a significant amount of code I'm talking about writing, but it would be treating several problems, not just one symptom.

Anyway, that's my two C-Bills. (1.25 C-Bills post patch).

[DocBach]

Malleus011, on 14 August 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

It does seem as if the game is moving further and further away from the user base's experience with the Battletech property. The stock Awesome has a hidden heat penalty. The stock Catapult A1 cannot deal any damage under 180 meters. While these mechs, as stock, are not optimal, they are currently deathtraps for rookie pilots.

Worse, they're depriving themselves of a number of mech designs due to the changes moving away from canon. A Panther or Urbanmech - a slow light - will be dead meat upon introduction. (I would buy one of each and suffer, of course) Three variants to master brings its own limitations.

I don't see why a simple system - to steal from a number of other shooting games (Mass Effect, COD, etc) - that makes the targeting reticle expand to show the possible hit area of weapons fire affected by movement, heat, and jumping. The faster you move, the more you overheat or jump the less accurate you are. This kind of scatter would prevent running and jumping mechs from dealing pinpoint damage (because not every weapon lands on the same spot), brings in something like the TT randomization. Walking and stationary mechs would be easier to hit. Pinpoint damage would be more rare.

Granted, that's probably a significant amount of code I'm talking about writing, but it would be treating several problems, not just one symptom.

Anyway, that's my two C-Bills. (1.25 C-Bills post patch).

but the M1 abrams and WWII Battleships could accurately fire weapons , mechwarrior is in the future!

[Malleus011]

Sure, but we can't apply much real world physics to Battletech or things start to fall apart. The gun ranges are amazingly short, for example. (Maximum range for a real .50 cal is what, 2,000 meters? MWO MGs shoot 10% of that) Thus we work with the system of the source material as much as possible.

Also, the size of the 'scatter' could influence things quite a bit. A 'walking' mech might scatter enough that every shot on the center of mass of an Atlas at 500 meters would still likely hit somewhere. A 'running' mech might scatter to a circle as wide as an Atlas at 200 meters. Those are just examples; the tweaking of that radius alone could allow an awful lot of game tweaking.

Even simpler fixes are possible, like preset convergence; the guns of a Jenner converge at 135 meters, just like a WWII fighter might be set. Advanced options could allow you to tinker with your mech's convergence setting.

Either of the above ideas would allow some 'hit randomization' and pull back from the pinpoint meta that plagues the game right now. There's more places where some nod to canon might help - mech sizes, for example, are mentioned elsewhere.

Mainly I'm just pointing out that there are a lot of known possible solutions to the issues MWO is running into; Ghost Heat or damage nerfing isn't the only possible fix for them.

[Lostdragon]

Personally I would really like to see how the game felt if they cut all damage across the board in half. I would love to see that go to the test server.