23 replies to this topic

[The Duke of Dirty]

In the current iteration, there is no reason not to play a team with 8 stalkers/highlanders who all have 2 PPC 2 Gauss because those weapons destroy EVERYTHING. That fact makes 8v8 so unfun that many people have quit playing. By making weapons effective against certain classes, we encourage diversity of both classes and weapons.

While playing today I figured out how to give every weight class of mech a *COMBAT* role without making massive changes to the game. Currently, if you want to maximize your chances of winning (and lets face it, most of us do!) there are a few mechs and guns that are clearly the best. However, to maximize our ENJOYMENT we should strive to have a game where every gun and every mech has a good chance of winning and is enjoyable. The best way to achieve this is to make every weapon good in specific situations, and no gun excel in every situation.

The eureka moment:

Spoiler

I was playing my golden boy with 26 SRM tubes. I fired them at a stationary commando from 50m. He took light damage across all of his systems. I fired them at the back of an Cataphract. He took heavy damage on his torso systems. Then I realised this:

Make each weapon stronger against specific 'mechs or classes of mechs. However, we want to do this without forcing it by saying "SRMs do double damage to assaults," but by using game mechanics that are fun for the player and easy to implement.
Here is an example from the current game:

Let us imagine a mech warrior universe where these things are true (as they are not all comepletly true in the current iteration, please dont nit pick this stuff that is not in the game, IT IS A PROPOSAL):

For example, an SRM15 fired at a commando will have many of the missiles miss their mark, and the ones that do hit the commando will do damage across all of the systems because they hit the mech all over (this is how it currently works). 2 gauss rifles fired at the same commando will do critical damage, likely destroying systems and crippling the 'mech (this is also how it currently works). So in our example, SRM15 and 2 gauss rifles both do 30 damage, but one is much better than the other against the commando.

On the other end of the spectrum, the SRM15 will do significant damage to just a few systems on an Cataphract because the systems are larger (this is how it currently works). The heavy armor of the Cataphract absorbs the entire salvo from the gauss, not taking critical system damage. (Lets assume this last part so that we can have a good example, the proposal for making this happen will come later)

How this works in he real game, right now:

Spoiler

fired at a commando and a cataphract at 100M with a single SRM 6 in testing grounds. Here is how the damage was done:




You can see that the damage is focused in once place on the cataphract, due to its larger size. The damage is very spread out on the commando, and it was actually only hit by 3 of the six missiles. So you can clearly see that not only did the commando take less damage than the cataphract from the missiles, but the cataphract also took the damage in one focused area of the mech.

Now, lets shoot them both in the right torso with gauss:


The commando lost the entire piece, while the Cataphract survived with full functionality!

So, let us now simplify the mechwarrior universe to just these 2 weapons and 'mechs. If you made a team of all Cataphractes, with all SRMs, your team would be quite strong against a team of all Cataphractes, however, it would be weak against a team of commandos using SRMs. The converse is also true. [/color]So we could then say that an effective team would be comprised of both Cataphractes and commandos with both types of weapons, and players have been encouraged to vary their mech and weapon choices, and use better teamwork using game mechanics not gimmicks.

For this example to work, we need to make the gauss less effective against heavier 'mechs. How do we do this? A proposal:
A Cataphract center torso has 70armor. When it is hit by small amounts of damage (2 from an SRM for example) it will take the full damage. When it is hit by large single shots (gauss for example) it will shed a portion of the damage to nearby systems (perhaps it splinters on the heavy armor and damages adjacent systems). So, with this proposal it would take 2 damage from an SRM, yet take only 8 from a gauss hit, shedding the other 7 to the adjacent side torsos and legs.

Current 2xGauss shot to the right torso:

Proposed change:


No proposed change vs lights.

A commando side torso has about 20 armor. It will take full damage from SRMs and full or nearly full damage from a gauss hit. 2 gauss rifles would then penetrate that 20 armor, doing critical system damage to the side torso. However, because SRMs naturally spread out and the commando side torso is so small, that section will not take much damage at all.

Also, by varying the roles of the weapons you can then vary the roles of the 'mechs. In this very limited example, making a commando to hunt other commandos using gauss would clearly be prohibitive because of the weight of gauss. However, if we add a new 'mech to our limited universe we can instantly find a role for it. Let us add in the HBK-4G. Now this 'mech has enough weight limit and space to fit a gauss, which using our previous assumptions would make it a good light hunter using its gauss cannon. It is slightly larger than a commando, making it take slightly more focused damage from SRMs. It also has 40 side torso armor, which would allow it to shed some of the damage from a gauss hit to adjacent areas.

So now let us examine our fictional universe. We have a commando, which can only use SRMs and will be very effective against Cataphracts and somewhat effective against hunchbacks but poor against other commandos. The HBK-4G can only use gauss not missiles because of its hardpoint restrictions, which makes it very effective against commandos, somewhat effective against hunchbacks and poor against the Cataphract. The Cataphract can use SRMs or gauss or both. However, it is so slow that it probably can not get close to an enemy Cataphract without encountering a commando first.

So what have we achieved in our fictional universe?
Cataphract variants that pack a bunch of SRMs will be the best to destroy Cataphracts. However, to reach enemy Cataphracts they will have the get past commandos which can easily intercept them because of their superior speed. These missile Cataphracts will not be able to do much damage to the Commandos. So, to reach the enemy Gauss Cataphracts they will need the support of Hunchbacks and Gauss Cataphracts. So once again we could then say that an effective team would be comprised of Cataphracts, Hunchbacks and commandos with both types of weapons, and players have been encouraged to vary their mech and weapon choices, and use better teamwork using game mechanics not gimmicks.

Now let us say that we “accidentally” release a new light hero mech that is *WAY* too strong. In a universe where all weapons are balanced against everything, this would be a problem as anyone who does not purchase this new hero mech would not have fun. However, in our fiction universe we would see an increase in gauss users in order to combat this overpowered light mech, making the system somewhat self balancing for the short term!

This system can be expanded to the entire game universe that PGI have already created, incorporating all weapons, and making them all useful and, dare I say, more flavorful and fun. I have ideas to expand this across all weapons, but I will not post them as I would rather have people discuss the idea as a whole instead of nit pick the specific weapons/counter systems.

Edited by Pwnius, 11 August 2013 - 11:00 AM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Hmm... a sort of damage resistance, maybe by class/chassis?



But colors for text ain't workin' for me.

[Liquidx]

this is not a good idea.

why would anyone play anything other than a super fast light mech if they take less damage and are harder to hit.

[Mystere]

You're joking, right?

[The Duke of Dirty]

Liquidx, on 10 August 2013 - 11:26 PM, said:

this is not a good idea.

why would anyone play anything other than a super fast light mech if they take less damage and are harder to hit.

I think you are missing the point. In the example light mechs would be vulnerable to precision weapons while larger meechs are more vulnerable to splash weapons. The lights do not take less damage from precision weapons.

Also, this is already how lights and SRMs work now heh. If you fire a full volly at 50 meters about 1/2 of them will miss. The others will hit various places but rarely the same place.

Allow me to add images to explain better.

I fired at a commando and a cataphract at 100M with a single SRM 6 in testing grounds. Here is how the damage was done:




You can see that the damage is focused in once place on the cataphract, due to its larger size. The damage is very spread out on the commando, and it was actually only hit by 3 of the six missiles. So you can clearly see that not only did the commando take less damage than the cataphract from the missiles, but the cataphract also took the damage in one focused area of the mech.


Now, lets shoot them both in the right torso with gauss:


The commando lost the entire piece, while the Cataphract survived with full functionality!

Edited by Pwnius, 11 August 2013 - 02:02 AM.

[Liquidx]

Pwnius, on 11 August 2013 - 12:53 AM, said:

The commando lost the entire piece, while the Cataphract survived with full functionality!

So.. the cataphract has more armor is what you're suggesting..
I for one am shocked.

Mech diversity will only come when role warfare becomes a reality and serves a purpose, however things such as the seismic sensor module, are counter productive to this.

IE: lights should not be expected to survive in toe to toe fights with mechs above their weight class. Yes, they can win fight vs heavier mechs, when there is a pilot skill imbalance, or when the heavier mech is being distracted my a stalker that just crested a hill in front of him... but assuming equal skill level and a 1v1 encounter, a light should be vaporized pretty much ever time.

Your example of missile spread is pretty easy to explain as well. It isn't the missile reacting differently - it's the difference between shooting a shotgun at a pigeon, and shooting it at a car. Obviously the thing with the larger profile is going to be hit with more pellets (or in MWO's case, missiles). The spread is going to look tighter on a larger mech because the mech is larger, not due to any difference in the flight path or damage of the missiles. Add in movement of the target and shooter to that equation and you're going to miss lights a whole lot more often (your example even missed a stationary target). So why exacerbate this effect by adding weapon inconsistencies based on the target mech.

Just doesn't make any sense. I don't think the problem of mech diversity would be solved by creating the kind of system you propose - it would just swing the pendulum in the opposite direction.

[The Duke of Dirty]

You all must not have heard. In the current iteration, there is no reason not to play a team with 8 stalkers/highlanders who all have 2 PPC 2 Gauss because those weapons destroy EVERYTHING. That fact makes 8v8 so unfun that many people have quit playing. By making weapons effective against certain classes, we encourage diversity of both classes and weapons.

Quote

Yes, lights can win fight vs heavier mechs, when there is a pilot skill imbalance, or when the heavier mech is being distracted my a stalker that just crested a hill in front of him... but assuming equal skill level and a 1v1 encounter, a light should be vaporized pretty much ever time.

This is the whole point. If we made weapons more specialized, so that there were some that were not very effective against lights, then lights would be able to fight and beat a 'mech packing only those weapons.

Edited by Pwnius, 11 August 2013 - 11:23 AM.

[Tennex]

light mechs can pull this off. but mediums cant cuz they make them oversized.

[Liquidx]

Pwnius, on 11 August 2013 - 10:59 AM, said:

This is the whole point. If we made weapons more specialized, so that there were some that were not very effective against lights, then lights would be able to fight and beat a 'mech packing only those weapons.

Well I'm not going to type my entire post again - but I'll reiterate, making weapons function inconsistently is not going to help the game. Defining a role for light and medium mechs (role warfare) is the only thing that will fix this.

IE: lights are scouting and skirmishing mechs and shouldn't be engaging larger mechs toe to toe. They should be used to flank, distract and antagonize the enemy. They are not brawlers. They should not be engaging in direct combat with larger mechs 1 on 1.

[ztac]

The point is weapon imbalance , seems you want to goto great lengths because the weapons are out of whack, but then the Gaus is probably the real reason of this because of the 0 heat when you fire it. PPC's will heat a mech up damn fast. The other problem is that the gaus have a very long range , and sniping is very possible using the 4x zoom module.

Making lights into super lights is just crazy. And if anything you would expect a light to go down like a brick out a window if it was hit by a large weapon, like shooting a pigeon with a piece of artillery!

The thing about this game is that every class expects to own every other class.... lights want to take down assaults .. LRM boats think they should be able to kill everything with a couple of salvo's , heavy's want to be better armoured and have more weapons ... even meds want a chance vs assaults! Unitl PGI can balance the game properly we wont see any of this.

You could say each team should consist of 1 of each weight class.... Then some people will get short queues and others very long ones! Or have games where all the classes are the same?

[LunarWind]

This is a great concept, it could work very well.
However, it is a rough concept.

Perhaps special ammo types (or focusing lenses?) to tailor weapons to specific targets?

I do agree that there needs to be some way to more highly specialize weapons, and mechs, for filling specific roles.
The current meta of "Best mech with Best gun" is really boring.

This is definitely a valuable suggestion, but it would need a lot of work put into it to cover all chassis/weapons/systems in the game.

[ICEFANG13]

Liquidx, on 11 August 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

So.. the cataphract has more armor is what you're suggesting..
I for one am shocked.

Mech diversity will only come when role warfare becomes a reality and serves a purpose, however things such as the seismic sensor module, are counter productive to this.

IE: lights should not be expected to survive in toe to toe fights with mechs above their weight class. Yes, they can win fight vs heavier mechs, when there is a pilot skill imbalance, or when the heavier mech is being distracted my a stalker that just crested a hill in front of him... but assuming equal skill level and a 1v1 encounter, a light should be vaporized pretty much ever time.

Your example of missile spread is pretty easy to explain as well. It isn't the missile reacting differently - it's the difference between shooting a shotgun at a pigeon, and shooting it at a car. Obviously the thing with the larger profile is going to be hit with more pellets (or in MWO's case, missiles). The spread is going to look tighter on a larger mech because the mech is larger, not due to any difference in the flight path or damage of the missiles. Add in movement of the target and shooter to that equation and you're going to miss lights a whole lot more often (your example even missed a stationary target). So why exacerbate this effect by adding weapon inconsistencies based on the target mech.

Just doesn't make any sense. I don't think the problem of mech diversity would be solved by creating the kind of system you propose - it would just swing the pendulum in the opposite direction.

Why don't you tell that to every single assault and heavy I've killed in a 1v1? Honestly mediums are scary to me, watching big fat guys, who are the only ones who should be able to get a kill, flail around helplessly when I murder them completely is a feeling no other game has succeeded in giving me.

You know what scout mechs are good for? The trash can. If a mech cannot have a chance in a 1v1, then you need to trash it or play with a team. You know what mechs should be 'scouting', every single one needs to relay information.

Light mechs, who are not messed up Spiders, don't ever fall into the mindset of, I can't kill anything because I'm a light mech. I've beaten groups of Atlas D-DCs in 8/12 mans by agility and control alone. In fact last night there was a team with 7 D-DC and 1 RS, and I got 5 kills, and 2 of them I was fighting 6 guys at once.

Lights shouldn't get a kill, you know assaults shouldn't break 30 KPH?

[Liquidx]

The fact that you are killing multiple atlases in a light mech in 2v1 or even 1v1 situations points to one of three possibilities :

1) they are very bad Atlas pilots
2) lights are broken
or
3) you're very good/lucky

my point is not that it is impossible to kill stuff in a light. My point is that lights should not be putting themselves into those situations in the first place. That isn't their role

[Hexenhammer]

Lets do something radical like see what this game is like if and when hit detection works correctly.

Edited by Hexenhammer, 11 August 2013 - 04:19 PM.

[The Duke of Dirty]

My opinion is:

If you want to destroy stuff in a giant robot you should play MWO.

If you want to drive something around and look at the nice countryside you should play Euro Truck Simulator.

Perhaps we should add some euro trucks to be the scouts and let the lights have a role in battle.

[ICEFANG13]

Liquidx, on 11 August 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

The fact that you are killing multiple atlases in a light mech in 2v1 or even 1v1 situations points to one of three possibilities :

1) they are very bad Atlas pilots
2) lights are broken
or
3) you're very good/lucky

my point is not that it is impossible to kill stuff in a light. My point is that lights should not be putting themselves into those situations in the first place. That isn't their role

Most of the pilots in 12v12 are terrible of course...

The Jenner has a broken hit box, you can literally hit CT from any angle, and its huge.

I'm unlucky, and very very good.

I'll let you decide your role as I decide mine. If you want me to be a scout, then I want assaults to be command mechs only. What was the Jenner called again? Oh yeah a striker and guerrilla fighter. Scout mechs only carry light weapons? Who in their right mind brings a mech with only 1 Medium Laser?

[The Duke of Dirty]

ICEFANG13, on 11 August 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

Who in their right mind brings a mech with only 1 Medium Laser?

The same guy who drives a spider 5V. AKA nobody LOL.

also, Jenner hitbox: http://i49.tinypic.com/34y1yz8.png

You can clearly see that the sides contain CT. Working as intended.

Edited by Pwnius, 11 August 2013 - 05:14 PM.

[Tincan Nightmare]

Ah please no. No forced paper beats rock beats scissors beats spock or whatever. So now in loadouts I would have to determine which weapons to mount based on what I hope to engage and kill, and if I pick wrong, end up doing less damage to the target I end up facing. I don't want to have to spread out what weapons I choose, picking one for assaults and one for lights, when we have a current system where weapons are equally effective against all mechs in terms of damage. Now I just base weapon selection on available tonnage and hardpoints, personal preference, and desired damage, range, and rate of fire. I do not want to add a new dimension of 'ok I need laser x to shoot heavies, but SRM-y to hurt lights.' A gauss rifle fires a supersonic round of very dense material, how does that do less damage if its target is a light or assault? I could maybe see special armor types (which did exist in BT as optional rules tech) that gave pros and cons against ballistic or energy attacks, but each weapon having only certain effectiveness based solely on the targets tonnage or weight class? Please, just no.

[Liquidx]

ICEFANG13, on 11 August 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

Most of the pilots in 12v12 are terrible of course...
I'm unlucky, and very very good.

And apparently a huge egomaniac, but that's another issue entirely

ICEFANG13, on 11 August 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

I'll let you decide your role as I decide mine. If you want me to be a scout, then I want assaults to be command mechs only. What was the Jenner called again? Oh yeah a striker and guerrilla fighter. Scout mechs only carry light weapons? Who in their right mind brings a mech with only 1 Medium Laser?

Well this is kind of the point. You are likely playing your mech correctly. You're not brawling, you're essentially the cavalry - quick strikes, spin your target around, give the big boys some opportunities to hit the flanks of the mechs that turn to hit you, and take off as safety allows. Rinse and repeat. Better yet you can be the flanker that strips the armor off of already engaged mechs, or hunting down lrm boats. Most lights excel in this kind of battle role.

But assuming you're taking on someone who is equally as skilled as you seem to think you are, if they're in a larger mech, you should probably think twice about engaging, or wait for some support. 1v1, players of equal skill and ability, a larger mech should almost always win vs a smaller mech assuming comparative weapons loadouts (ie: not lrms vs brawling weapons).

The problem is, a lot of players seem to think lights should be brawlers - and these are the target of my previous posts. Of course you can play any way you like, but most likely, the best success comes with guerrilla hit and run or flanking tactics.

Again, I'm not saying lights should not be involved in fights - but they also should not have an easy time against heavies or assaults. Killing other lights and mediums is where you will likely have the most success because they are carrying a payload much closer to your own as far as armor/weapon tonnage is concerned.

Assuming PGI develops role warfare correctly, the larger mechs should be much less common. Medium mechs have traditionally been the core of any fighting force because heavies and assaults were very expensive to maintain, and were prone to joint failures in battletech lore. If PGI wants to re-create this (and I believe they have stated as much in the past), they have a lot of work to do in carving out niches for anything under 70 tons. Applying damage modifiers to weapons vs mech weights (as per the OP) is not the way to do this.

Pwnius, on 11 August 2013 - 04:41 PM, said:

also, Jenner hitbox: http://i49.tinypic.com/34y1yz8.png
You can clearly see that the sides contain CT. Working as intended.

This is likely to make up for the rather small arm based weapons pods, and tiny side torsos that allow you to mount an XL engine care free. In other words, you're almost never going to lose a side torso in a jenner. This is more of an advantage than a disadvantage IMO. CT can mount far more armor, and XL's make you go zoom for 1/2 the weight of a standard. You can see this same principle in effect on Dragons. Most of the time this allows you to stay in fights and keep all of your weapons much longer than other mechs.

working as intended imo.


At any rate, your idea is still a poorly thought out one, and one that would completely break the game if it were implemented.

[IrrelevantFish]

If you can't find a way to run something besides a mess of HGN-732s, you're not looking very hard. Some of the most ROFL-stompy kind of organized matches I've played were drops with/against teams of nothing but fast mediums.

However, you're absolutely right that jump-snipers and alpha-monsters are OP. The SRM buff helped a lot, but the meta could use a little more tweaking.

Unfortunately, your proposal is NOT the solution. It would add tons of new balancing issues, create new loopholes to exploit, and cause a million more rage-quits. I vote a resounding nay.