228 replies to this topic

[VXJaeger]

Why not make configuring mechs forbidden and make only PGI's pre-configured mechs available? That should be answer to all nerf-buff whines in one simple solution. Too bad that most of fascination of game is modifying, but it comes out useless 'cause everything will be same ****.
This nerf-buff BS will lead game back to oblivion where it was for years, 'cause there will never be "balance" what would satisfy everybody.

Edited by VXJaeger, 15 August 2013 - 02:53 AM.

[Brilig]

Karl Streiger, on 15 August 2013 - 01:48 AM, said:

just nerf them back into the hot slow energy ball thrower - instead of creating COUNTERs

I'm not sure we are on the same page here. The changes they made to PPC made the weapon useable. Before it was terrible, and I wouldn't want to see it nerfed back into uselessness. What needs to be fixed is the convergence mechanic. It is what allows for the single section hitting high damage alpha issues.

Karl Streiger, on 15 August 2013 - 01:48 AM, said:

perfect example - de Devastator or the Annihilator
2 Gauss and 2 PPCs --> or the 40dmg each 2.5sec --> it is obvious that non of the existing balance or the balance to come - can fix those Mechs - so hope they will never show up

I really hope those mechs make it into the game. Before they do I hope the Devs have broken down, and fixed convergence.

Either mech can load 2PPC+2Gauss for a 40 point damage alpha. That isn't a problem. It will only be a problem if they can fire all 4 weapons at once, and hit the same section for all 40 points of damage.

[Rotta]

PPC will be good even if you inc the heat and dec the projectile speed.

About the balance btw. 12 snipers VS 12 brawlers...

If the brawlers are simply taking cover and trying to avoid sniping -> Snipers win.
If the brawlers decide together that they go to kick some sniper *ss -> Brawlers win.

It is good to have a sniper with good alpha, but team full of snipers wont win the game. Also if the sniper gets in close range fight -> It will be a dead sniper. Speed should be a factor when playing snipers. Sniper should focus to keep the distance and not just faceroll and watch the damage meter to go high.


edit: Oh, I forgot to say the point.

The weapon convergence etc. things wont fix the situation -> Because the long range weapons can still be used equally well in short and long ranges. Short range weapons can only be used in short range fights. Why to use short range weapons then at all?

So there has to be far more heat for long range to balance with the short range weapons.

Edited by Rotta, 15 August 2013 - 03:10 AM.

[Villz]

MrZakalwe, on 14 August 2013 - 02:19 AM, said:

I'm a big PPC user and they currently do too much, too well.
1) Excellent pinpoint damage.
2) Ammoless.
3) Accurate at long range even against moving targets.
4) Currently seem to be bugged so they do high damage at close range.
5) Do not require you to stare at people or stay out of cover long.
6) Disrupt ECM.
7) Do not weigh much.
8) Only produce slightly more heat than several inferior laser alternatives.

If they slowed down projectile speeds to make them less lethal against fast targets and sorted out the minimum range damage drop off there wouldn't be an issue with PPCs.

yeh sure right at the time they fix hsr so i can go back to melting your legs off with 6 LL shots ;-)

[Karl Streiger]

Brilig, on 15 August 2013 - 02:26 AM, said:

I'm not sure we are on the same page here. The changes they made to PPC made the weapon useable.

Hm maybe its because we both encoutered different Ping issues. Believe me - i knew and loved the PPC as a hard hitting weapon - nearly impossible to hit anything that moved faster as 90kph.
And it was ok - because i had lasers or SSRMs to fight of the buggers.

a decrease in flight speed as well as an increase in heat - will not make this weapon useless - as long as hit detection works and the trigger delay is removed - the closed beta PPC is a superb weapon. I dunno if you remember but back in those old days there were some people that said - leave the PPC at it is - and i was one of them - all those buffing was necessary only because of bad hit detection and the delay between click and shot.

[Geminus]

TSB101, on 14 August 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:

Those two PPC's in my left arm are going to hit the same spot 100% of the time. Usually I can get the Gauss to land there too. Quite a difference from TT to MWO.

Targeting computers use tonnage do they not? I can perform better than a targeting computer and I only weight 200 lbs. So no, you don't get a targeting computer. =P

What are the odds without a targeting computer? Not that I really should care - MWO should not cling too heavily to TT to balance the game. My point remains.

Also I realize you were just answering my question and not actually arguing against my point. I may come off aggressive. Thank you for the information.

The answer to this is in changing the aiming/hit mechanic, not in changing the weapons. Not the first time ive posted this in this forum yet no one seems to notice.
If you implenemt a cone aiming system, where as there is a "ghost radius" around the aiming reticule where your shots will randomly hit, you get a accurate dipiction of the inacuracy that the mechs are supposed to have due to degrading technology. When the mech is moving or jumping, ghost ring gets bigger, cone spreads out, mech is standing still, ghost ring an cone are smaller allowing for tighter groups and more accuracy. Then the mechs won't act like they have targeting computers, which do take up ton and crit space.
Then the devs can put in targeting computers, that you can choose to mount on your mech if you want to be the sniper guy on the team.
But fix what the problem is, not everything else.

[MrZakalwe]

Geminus, on 15 August 2013 - 03:49 AM, said:

The answer to this is in changing the aiming/hit mechanic, not in changing the weapons. Not the first time ive posted this in this forum yet no one seems to notice.
If you implenemt a cone aiming system, where as there is a "ghost radius" around the aiming reticule where your shots will randomly hit, you get a accurate dipiction of the inacuracy that the mechs are supposed to have due to degrading technology. When the mech is moving or jumping, ghost ring gets bigger, cone spreads out, mech is standing still, ghost ring an cone are smaller allowing for tighter groups and more accuracy. Then the mechs won't act like they have targeting computers, which do take up ton and crit space.
Then the devs can put in targeting computers, that you can choose to mount on your mech if you want to be the sniper guy on the team.
But fix what the problem is, not everything else.

Cone of fire- not a great solution in a game where you cannot stop quickly, often fire many weapons at once, have hugely differing target profiles and have travel time for some weapons.

Cone of fire opens up situations where duels may end up heavily influenced by luck and that's bad.

[Prezimonto]

Wolfways, on 14 August 2013 - 09:02 PM, said:

You do realize that to make a single ERPPC heat neutral you need 30SHS, or 20DHS (10engine+10external)? 10tons + engine weight...

Heat neutral doesn't matter for anything but short range brawling. All you need is a decent dissipation rate to devastate the other team before they can get close to you. Also, the basic PPC is a better direct match against the AC10 given a more similar range and a bit higher penalties (no extreme short range), but it also runs quite a bit cooler. From actual in game experience 14 DHS are enough to cool an ERPPC quickly enough that it's an eminently usable weapon. That will also cool 2 PPC's well enough to use them in all but the thickest of fights.

Heat neutral is a wonderful place to be, but doesn't begin to address "usable". And the PPC's are so good they are easily usable and still a BETTER choice than any other weapon system for their tonnage and slots even when well under "heat neutral".

If people want to keep the current specs of the PPC it should have a shot charge time of a few seconds. As in you push the button and the weapon charges up for a two seconds. I wouldn't even mind if you scaled the damage done and recycle time to the "charge time". This would Force a player to have well above common aiming and timing to hit at long ranges and to hit specific mech hardpoints in close.

Edited by Prezimonto, 15 August 2013 - 04:24 AM.

[Hekalite]

Rotta, on 15 August 2013 - 02:32 AM, said:

edit: Oh, I forgot to say the point.

The weapon convergence etc. things wont fix the situation -> Because the long range weapons can still be used equally well in short and long ranges. Short range weapons can only be used in short range fights. Why to use short range weapons then at all?

So there has to be far more heat for long range to balance with the short range weapons.

I agree with this, but it doesn't have to be done with more heat. You could balance long range weapons by making them fire a lot slower. I wouldn't even mind high damage alphas so much if the sniper really had to pick and choose his shots. Right now it's difficult to advance through cover given the recycle speed of the long range weapons.

I would like to see some sort significant disadvantage to short range use of weapons which should rule the long range game. If they can pull that off, I'll deal with getting instacored by a highly skilled player from across the map.

[Joseph Mallan]

VXJaeger, on 14 August 2013 - 11:28 PM, said:

Why not to limit usage of PPCs to assault mechs only? That would take care of those (ER)PPC Jenners, Cicadas, Spiders and Ravens that I have seen lately and would drop amount of PPCs in the match.
And amount of assaults will be later taken care of tonnage limit, so theres no need to "fix" the PPCs.

Seems like the biggest problem is that light pilots are whining 'cause they get their legs shot off, and miss the "Good ol' lagshield days".

Panther
Falcon Hawk
Talon
Wight (HEAVY PPC)

4 Light designs that carry a PPC. I wonder how many Canon Mediums carry PPCs And then there is the Warhammer, Marauder in the heavies that just ends the idea of Assaults only carrying PPCs.

[Coralld]

Brilig, on 15 August 2013 - 02:26 AM, said:

I'm not sure we are on the same page here. The changes they made to PPC made the weapon useable. Before it was terrible, and I wouldn't want to see it nerfed back into uselessness. What needs to be fixed is the convergence mechanic. It is what allows for the single section hitting high damage alpha issues.



I really hope those mechs make it into the game. Before they do I hope the Devs have broken down, and fixed convergence.

Either mech can load 2PPC+2Gauss for a 40 point damage alpha. That isn't a problem. It will only be a problem if they can fire all 4 weapons at once, and hit the same section for all 40 points of damage.

Correction, its a 50 point alpha, Gauss do 15 damage each.

[Pinselborste]

Problem is that damage and hit Locations are based on TT and not made for mwo,

if the damage would be calculated like in a flight sim where the stuff you hit gets damaged, and not hitting the finger on a mech damages the whole arm it would already work better.

Need to breach three different spots on the Center Torso instead of just firing Alpha after Alpha on the same spot would also Need some thinking.

[IronChance]

Geminus, on 15 August 2013 - 03:49 AM, said:

The answer to this is in changing the aiming/hit mechanic, not in changing the weapons. Not the first time ive posted this in this forum yet no one seems to notice.
If you implenemt a cone aiming system, where as there is a "ghost radius" around the aiming reticule where your shots will randomly hit, you get a accurate dipiction of the inacuracy that the mechs are supposed to have due to degrading technology. When the mech is moving or jumping, ghost ring gets bigger, cone spreads out, mech is standing still, ghost ring an cone are smaller allowing for tighter groups and more accuracy. Then the mechs won't act like they have targeting computers, which do take up ton and crit space.
Then the devs can put in targeting computers, that you can choose to mount on your mech if you want to be the sniper guy on the team.
But fix what the problem is, not everything else.

Wait. Your solution is to take aim out of the game? Aim? Really? Seriously? Out of a FPS game? What exactly would be the point of even piloting your mech? Why not just put a big "Simulate" button where the launch button is now and then just watch SimMechWarrior Online? If you want to have random dice rolls determine your accuracy go play Tactics.

And I can't imagine anyone saying AC10's are better than PPCs are actually playing the game competitively. That's fine, by the way. Play the game the way you want to play, but don't tell me there isn't a problem with the PPC/Gauss combo when that's all I see when I'm dropping and anytime I see someone trying a dual AC10 mech they're getting their face caved in.

[Karl Streiger]

Pinselborste, on 15 August 2013 - 10:34 AM, said:

Need to breach three different spots on the Center Torso instead of just firing Alpha after Alpha on the same spot would also Need some thinking.

I really believe it would have been awesome to have multiple hit zones with multiple armor values - with damage threshold, absorption - penetration and of course critical components that have a location rather then random roll.So instead of aiming for the heavy armored gun you can take a shot to the lesser armored shoulder - not causing much internal damage.

Just imagine - you burn a hole into the armor with your lasers - and then you fire a high explosive shell into the gap - causing much more internal damage.

Well not TT but how it should be.

[Lootee]

Karl Streiger, on 15 August 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

Just imagine - you burn a hole into the armor with your lasers - and then you fire a high explosive shell into the gap - causing much more internal damage.

Well not TT but how it should be.

That's how Renegade Legion was (also a FASA game, but with anti-grav tanks instead of mechs). Different weapons made different damage profiles when they hit armor. Ex: a laser would bore a straight line, HEAP rounds made a cone shaped hit, and HammerHead rounds did a straight line at first but then exploded sideways.

Any armor that got cut off by say, a laser hit and then a HammerHead warhead flying into the same hole and exploding sideways was counted as destroyed. Pretty nifty concept but the game never really took off.

Edited by PanchoTortilla, 15 August 2013 - 02:59 PM.

[Geminus]

IronChance, on 15 August 2013 - 12:30 PM, said:

Wait. Your solution is to take aim out of the game? Aim? Really? Seriously? Out of a FPS game? What exactly would be the point of even piloting your mech? Why not just put a big "Simulate" button where the launch button is now and then just watch SimMechWarrior Online? If you want to have random dice rolls determine your accuracy go play Tactics.

And I can't imagine anyone saying AC10's are better than PPCs are actually playing the game competitively. That's fine, by the way. Play the game the way you want to play, but don't tell me there isn't a problem with the PPC/Gauss combo when that's all I see when I'm dropping and anytime I see someone trying a dual AC10 mech they're getting their face caved in.

I did not say take aim out of the game. read the post. Like Clancy introduced in rainbow six, the point of aim is not the same as point of impact due to variables. In fact, every Clancy FPS has this. For this it would just need to be "opened up" some more. Moving causes the aiming reticule to open up due to the inaccuracy caused by moving. standing still causes it to shrink. These mechs do not have complex targeting computers. I am saying that their should be like this: imagine that the reticle is not the tiny pinpoint accurate cross hair hat you see. Imagine it is a ring about the size of a dime on a 20 inch monitor. your shots will be placed randomly inside that dime. The dime will be bigger or smaller in size depending on whether you are moving, running, jumping or standing still. You do not see the dime, you see the standard cross hair. This accurately replicates the table top, books and all btech cannon. It allows the "fix" to all weapons simultaneously, as they are still direct fire, you can still aim them, they just are not as accurate. Heat build up would also cause the "dime" to open up.

And like I said in my first post. This is like putting one TV on CNN and another On fox news, setting the TVs in front of each other and seeing which one talks the other in to changing their mind first. So I am signing out of this.

Edited by Geminus, 15 August 2013 - 04:15 PM.

[Brilig]

Karl Streiger, on 15 August 2013 - 03:36 AM, said:

a decrease in flight speed as well as an increase in heat - will not make this weapon useless

I could see a reduction in flight speed as a temp solution. I think making it any hotter could cripple it.

[MischiefSC]

Tincan Nightmare, on 15 August 2013 - 01:19 AM, said:

Yep, like the rules in Strategic Operations. On pg. 183 its does list replacing an engine as 360 minutes, to replace a destroyed engine with the same type, so yes 6 hours. However, on pg. 188, it lists the needed refit kits to make modifications to mechs. A class D refit kit does allow for the changing of the engines rating, but not its type (so no switch to XL) and adds a multiplier to time of 3, so it is now 1080 minutes. To swap out a Mechs internal structure or change engine type, requires a class F kit(factory). That means it can not be performed in the field and must be done at a factory that is capable of actually constructing the unit, and adds a time multiplier of 5, so now it is 1800 minutes. It even gives an example of upgrading a Jager-S to a DD and how it would require a factory refit to pull off. I don't mean to flog a dead horse, or to hijack this thread, so I will stop here. But it just amazes me that you think a tech could just basically rebuild a Mech from the inside out, replacing its engine and even basic structure at whim. But please, stop trying to use a table that reflects time for repairing a mech as proof on how easy it is to modify one. I do not want the customization rules of TT in MWO, otherwise we wouldn't even be able to change weapons without much effort, but frankly if we were going by the lore our mechs would be as is when bought unless we were clanners, and believe me I enjoy playing mech tech too much to want that. My apologies to all the other posters on this thread for this sidetrack discussion.

Not to add to a problem but he's still right. Technically it's days between matches, plenty of time to completely refit a mech assuming you have access to a full bay on your dropship or wherever your mech is based. These are not field repairs - austensibly you're traveling between systems for drops.

Admittedly you should have a risk of odd issues for frankenstein mechs. Any equipment that's outside of the standard build should have a tiny odds of generating extra heat or doing less damage or reduced accuracy on that shot. most of the custom mechs had that issue.

Still though, how customizable they are isn't the issue - it's the cost. You don't generally have a lance of mechwarriors all with tens of millions (or hundreds of millions) of cbills in the bank to spend on D and F kits, stockpiles of equipment and supplies. In TT it would be just.... flat out silly to spend 5 million cbills tweaking a Hunchback but I've done it 3 times to get the worthless little ******** to Elite.

[MischiefSC]

Joseph Mallan, on 15 August 2013 - 06:17 AM, said:

Panther
Falcon Hawk
Talon
Wight (HEAVY PPC)

4 Light designs that carry a PPC. I wonder how many Canon Mediums carry PPCs And then there is the Warhammer, Marauder in the heavies that just ends the idea of Assaults only carrying PPCs.

Griffin! FTW!

That's a good point. Mediums almost never did PPCs.

Oh Griffin. *sniff*


You make my cooling suit fit funny.

[Joseph Mallan]

Tincan Nightmare, on 15 August 2013 - 01:19 AM, said:

Yep, like the rules in Strategic Operations. On pg. 183 its does list replacing an engine as 360 minutes, to replace a destroyed engine with the same type, so yes 6 hours. However, on pg. 188, it lists the needed refit kits to make modifications to mechs. A class D refit kit does allow for the changing of the engines rating, but not its type (so no switch to XL) and adds a multiplier to time of 3, so it is now 1080 minutes. To swap out a Mechs internal structure or change engine type, requires a class F kit(factory). That means it can not be performed in the field and must be done at a factory that is capable of actually constructing the unit, and adds a time multiplier of 5, so now it is 1800 minutes. It even gives an example of upgrading a Jager-S to a DD and how it would require a factory refit to pull off. I don't mean to flog a dead horse, or to hijack this thread, so I will stop here. But it just amazes me that you think a tech could just basically rebuild a Mech from the inside out, replacing its engine and even basic structure at whim. But please, stop trying to use a table that reflects time for repairing a mech as proof on how easy it is to modify one. I do not want the customization rules of TT in MWO, otherwise we wouldn't even be able to change weapons without much effort, but frankly if we were going by the lore our mechs would be as is when bought unless we were clanners, and believe me I enjoy playing mech tech too much to want that. My apologies to all the other posters on this thread for this sidetrack discussion.

Samuel "Shorty" Sneede. Rifleman,Phoenix Hawk, Warhammer Thing!

Quote

While a tech on Clinton, Shorty marked some parts to a 'Mech as "cooking supplies", and smuggled them off the battlefield. With these, he built his own BattleMech.

Marcus GeoAvanti, Swapped out his Gauss, PPC for Clan equivalents in the Mechbay of the Head of a Pin Fortress class dropship. I am sure there are other notable Upgrades that did not happen in a Factory. I will agree that a Endo swap would need one, but who says we didn't use a factory/train tech to get the upgrade done???

Oh an 1800 minutes (1,800/60=30) 30 hours or 4 8 hour days. Again doable between missions thanks to Handwavium. And I seem to remember someone switching out an engine for an XL in the fiction...

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 15 August 2013 - 06:15 PM.