158 replies to this topic

[Raidyr]

Dago Red, on 10 September 2013 - 01:57 AM, said:

I'd say in any game with asymmetrical class balance requiring a mixed team to play towards their strengths in such a way that it complements their vastly different teammates that evasion tanking is totally a thing.

If that scout is intentionally baiting someone with a slow firing weapon into shooting at them instead of a teammate that's about blow them away with superior firepower while they're distracted then it very much falls into the holy trinity gameplay setup. Hell using TF2 as an example works against you as it even has healers.

That's not what evasion tanking is though. No one has ever played CS or CoD or Battlefield or Halo or TF2 and missed a shot and thought "damn he really did evasion tank me". It's called missing your shot in a shooter game. Any shooter game. TF2 having medics doesn't work against me until you can find one person who has ever seriously used the words "evasion tank" to describe people moving to dodge gunfire and explosives. It doesn't happen.

"Evasion tanking" comes from RPG's and MMO's like WoW or EVE where your characters statistics drove the combat rather than actual player input. Feral druids in WoW tanked by stacking agility. Ships in EVE make use of high speed to defeat turret tracking and outrun missiles. This is an actual defensive tactic that exists in other games and doesn't overlap with MWO which is firmly in FPS territory.

If you think light mechs should be nerfed for having the audacity to use their mobility and dodge your poorly-aimed shots then come out and say it, but don't misappropriate words to make your inaccuracy sound more important than it really is.

Edited by Raidyr, 10 September 2013 - 03:18 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Imperius, on 09 September 2013 - 08:41 PM, said:

I think you should take a little damage and come to a complete stop and get stunned depending on the speed you hit said object.

Edit:Collisions are going to come back it was said in the NGNG podcast with Bryan Eckman. So lets help them come up with a not so grieving way to implement it.

Yeah I'm sure it was said in a NGNG that we wouldn't have 3rd Person an Coolant Flush, So don't hold your breath.

[Hexenhammer]

Should collision be in the game? Yes
Should it be in hardcore mode? Yes
Should collision be in mechassult- I mean MWO with 3pv? Dont know


I do remember collisions in closed beta.

The good.
Knocking a mech down, then plowing it was a a highly effective tactic against anything you could knock down.
Zombie mechs will have one last weapon to use.
It needs to be in the game

The bad, the ugly
All that bumping and grinding at the start of a match? Yeah that's going to cost a commando his arm.
All that bumping and grinding during a match? Yeah it adds up.
Even with 3pv in the game people will be bouncing off people. We do it enough as is.
Getting knocked down, and plowed while waiting to get back up.
It felt like you were knocked down by your own team more than the enemy
Getting knocked downed and waiting to get up seemed to take forever. More so when you're being attacked
Going down and getting back up broke the pace of the game. Nothing dcreams Action!" Like getting up three or four times in a match due to knockdown.


The broke.
Dragon bowling. It's why collision isnt in the game.

[stjobe]

As a side note on physical attacks, two 48kph Atlases running into each other head-on would take 60 damage each (50 from getting charged, 10 from charging) if the damage was based on BT values.

With single armour values that would be devastating; with our doubled armour values it's still a ton of damage.

[Raidyr]

Hexenhammer, on 10 September 2013 - 03:31 AM, said:

All that bumping and grinding at the start of a match? Yeah that's going to cost a commando his arm.

But it's the Commando's fault that he isn't a good enough pilot to avoid the 5 ******* on his team who don't notice him at the beginning of a match. We need collisions to punish light players er I mean add strategy and depth and lore and buzzwords to the game!

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 10 September 2013 - 03:37 AM, said:

As a side note on physical attacks, two 48kph Atlases running into each other head-on would take 60 damage each (50 from getting charged, 10 from charging) if the damage was based on BT values.

With single armour values that would be devastating; with our doubled armour values it's still a ton of damage.

And should be. Cause it is two 100 ton vehicles colliding at 48 KpH!

[Dago Red]

Raidyr, on 10 September 2013 - 03:15 AM, said:

That's not what evasion tanking is though. No one has ever played CS or CoD or Battlefield or Halo or TF2 and missed a shot and thought "damn he really did evasion tank me". It's called missing your shot in a shooter game. Any shooter game. TF2 having medics doesn't work against me until you can find one person who has ever seriously used the words "evasion tank" to describe people moving to dodge gunfire and explosives. It doesn't happen.

"Evasion tanking" comes from RPG's and MMO's like WoW or EVE where your characters statistics drove the combat rather than actual player input. Feral druids in WoW tanked by stacking agility. Ships in EVE make use of high speed to defeat turret tracking and outrun missiles. This is an actual defensive tactic that exists in other games and doesn't overlap with MWO which is firmly in FPS territory.

If you think light mechs should be nerfed for having the audacity to use their mobility and dodge your poorly-aimed shots then come out and say it, but don't misappropriate words to make your inaccuracy sound more important than it really is.

Well firstly I wouldn't be applying it to something like counterstrike or any other "realistic" shooter where everyone on a team has the same base speed and damage taking abilities. However a TF2's scout is fast and squishy and has the job of annoying the other team while dodging the retaliation in addition to his base capping duties. No if a soldier or a heavy that would have otherwise taken the shots aimed at the scout gets to line up his shot better or live longer to do more damage then the the scout has provided damage mitigation to the team and in effect "tanked".

Now take Tera. It's a fully on MMO but the warrior class in it is built around dodge tanking, You **** the enemy off and the use your superior mobility and monkey back flips to not get hit rather than just getting punched in the face and having enough hp to take it or standing still and letting the math determine that the enemy missed. Still you're a tank and one that does so by evading dig? Tanking is making a hit that would have hit someone on your team who couldn't take it as well as you go your way instead regardless of your means of mitigating your own damage.

I actually don't want lights nerfed is the thing I just think you apply terms that work with any team game of this nature too narrowly. I feel Evasion tanking is a fine role and a service to the team. Would you argue that an atlas isn't tanking by having the enemy focus on him and taking the hits on his beefy armor while the mediums around him get ignored and get the chance to unleash hell?

Still would be a hell of a thing to be able to go bowling with them if they're dumb enough to run into you though.

Edited by Dago Red, 10 September 2013 - 04:03 AM.

[stjobe]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 September 2013 - 03:49 AM, said:

And should be. Cause it is two 100 ton vehicles colliding at 48 KpH!

Sure. But an Atlas "charging" another 'mech at 10kph does 10 damage (and takes 10 damage itself).

So a low-speed, possibly accidental, brush with a friendly 'mech does as much damage to both 'mechs as being hit by an AC/10.

People might want to be careful what they wish for...

Another thought since we're talking about physical attacks; perhaps the "Raaah! Lights are OP!" crowd should demand physical attacks instead of collisions and knockdowns? A kick from an Atlas does 20 damage to anything it hits - that would be a very effective deterrent for keeping lights away from your immediate vicinity

[Rippthrough]

I'd rather have it back, it sorted the good light pilots out from the circle-jerking packs of streak users.

However, I'd also rather have 90% of collisions just result in a loud 'CLANG' and turn both mechs away from each other, or twist their torsos, and only have proper knockdowns happen when there's say a dragon and a jenner running full speed directly towards each other.

[Raidyr]

Dago Red, on 10 September 2013 - 03:59 AM, said:

I actually don't want lights nerfed is the thing I just think you apply terms that work with any team game of this nature too narrowly. I feel Evasion tanking is a fine role and a service to the team.

You are trying way too hard to make his statement that somehow him missing a shot means lights have better defensive power than assaults through some "evasion tanking" concept but I'm atleast happy you don't want to nerf a category of mechs that is for the most part blatantly underpowered.

Rippthrough, on 10 September 2013 - 04:04 AM, said:

I'd rather have it back, it sorted the good light pilots out from the circle-jerking packs of streak users.

it actually didn't sort good pilots out at all so much as it sorted out people who were willing to adapt and later abuse the system. Right before it was removed matches could often be seen devolving into bumper car pileups of Dragons and Jenners jetting into people for their teammates to fully alpha in the back. Part of me misses abusing it because of the sheer hilarity of it, but the game got better when knockdowns were removed and I'd hate to see them return.

Edited by Raidyr, 10 September 2013 - 04:10 AM.

[Livewyr]

I think:

Two light mechs colliding at super high speed high speed should knock them both over and cause heavy damage to the effected areas. The meta of "shove the biggest engine in your minimech and drive around at warp speed" needs to end in favor of using your brain and maneuverability to survive.

That being said:
Same goes for mediums, heavies, and assaults. (If two atlases crash into eachother at 60kph, there should be some violent rocking, torso jarring, and depending on how they collided- both get knocked down.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, there should be a sliding scale of damage..
Inertia (speed*tonnage) should effect how much damage.

A couple of mechs bumping into each-other at a walking speed should give some jarring and awhee bit of damage at the contact points. (This also includes mechs walking slowly into a mech isn't moving.)

Sliding scale up to-
Two Atlases crashing into each-other at 65kph should wreck both of them pretty hardcore, if not take off limbs.

(Or a Jenner running into an atlas at 140kph needs to be pretty much mangled if not destroyed, and damage the atlas some.)

Two Jenners colliding at 140/150 kph should heavily damage the areas connected and drive them both into the dirt. However, two jenner's colliding at 40-50 kph should get some jarring and minor damage at contact points.

Collision damage should be turned OFF for the first 25 seconds of the game.

-------------------------

Knockdowns need to happen to both sides (to prevent Dragon Bowling) except in the case of a mech 1/3d the size of the other mech running into that mech- while that mech is walking slowly or sitting still. (If the mech is at Run speed and gets hit, it needs to fall over regardless.. even an Atlas.)


Goals:
To discourage running around brawling at light speed. (shoving the biggest engine in your mech and ping-ponging around the battlefield not only ruins the spirit of a thinking man's shooter and generates lag, it just looks dumb.)

To discourage/prevent griefing. (A: Dragons wouldn't have the miracle stability thing they had in CBT: B: Sure.. you can collide with that much to bowl him over if you really want to.. but both of you are going to pay dearly for it.)

To minimize punishment for accidentally backing into a mech, or bumping into mechs while you learn to drive. (A: The base is crowded when you start out, and it's tough to be a faster/lighter mech in there.. B: With no rear view, backing into someone slowly should be an annoyance and not a capital offense.)


--------------------------------

Just spitballing here.. but this light mech meta of brawling with the heavies using speed needs to come back down to reality.


Speed has its risks.

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 10 September 2013 - 04:01 AM, said:

Sure. But an Atlas "charging" another 'mech at 10kph does 10 damage (and takes 10 damage itself).

So a low-speed, possibly accidental, brush with a friendly 'mech does as much damage to both 'mechs as being hit by an AC/10.

People might want to be careful what they wish for...

Another thought since we're talking about physical attacks; perhaps the "Raaah! Lights are OP!" crowd should demand physical attacks instead of collisions and knockdowns? A kick from an Atlas does 20 damage to anything it hits - that would be a very effective deterrent for keeping lights away from your immediate vicinity

My question would be what kind of damage would a LAV take from a fender bender with an Abrams? And yes Punting lights is a blast!

[hashinshin]

Hexenhammer, on 10 September 2013 - 03:31 AM, said:

Should collision be in the game? Yes
Should it be in hardcore mode? Yes
Should collision be in mechassult- I mean MWO with 3pv? Dont know

HAH, he made a joke about this game being like mechassault cause it has 3pv!

Damned PGI giving mechwarrior online 3PV, I'm gonna go back and play mechwarrior 2 where there was no 3pv! I mean mechwarrior 3 where there was no- I mean mechwarrior 4 where- mechwarrior 4 mercenar- mechwarrior 4 onli- .... hum.

It's amazing how many battletech fundamentalists are this stupid. 3pv has been a crucial learning component of every mechwarrior game, and PGI has gone WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY out of their way to ensure that 3pv is unusable for combat to force (yes FORCE) people to use first person in combat. If this was a previous mechwarrior title we'de all be sitting in 3pv jump sniping with clan ER PPCs all day. Would you prefer we go retro and bring back jump sniping, then change 3pv so it's easy to snipe with it?

Freaking fundies.

[stjobe]

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

Two Atlases crashing into each-other at 65kph should wreck both of them pretty hardcore, if not take off limbs.

Using the BT rules, both would take 70 damage (60 from getting charged, 10 from

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

(Or a Jenner running into an atlas at 140kph needs to be pretty much mangled if not destroyed, and damage the atlas some.)

Using the BT rules, the Jenner would do 49 damage to the Atlas and take 10 itself.

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

Two Jenners colliding at 140/150 kph should heavily damage the areas connected and drive them both into the dirt.

Using the BT rules, the Jenners would take 53 damage each (50 from being charged, 3 from charging)

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

However, two jenner's colliding at 40-50 kph should get some jarring and minor damage at contact points.

Using the BT rules, the Jenners would take 20 damage each (17 from being charged, 3 from charging)

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

Collision damage should be turned OFF for the first 25 seconds of the game.

Or perhaps collision damage shouldn't use the charging rules; charging could be a special attack initiated by a key-press as I suggested earlier.

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

Knockdowns need to happen to both sides (to prevent Dragon Bowling) except in the case of a mech 1/3d the size of the other mech running into that mech- while that mech is walking slowly or sitting still. (If the mech is at Run speed and gets hit, it needs to fall over regardless.. even an Atlas.)

Someone somewhere (perhaps it was you?) had a suggestion about "gyro stability" and "gyro overloading", that would prohibit knock-downs unless the gyro was overloaded (e.g. from running, jumping, or walking on uneven terrain). At walking speeds on even terrain a 'mech couldn't be knocked-over.

I kind of liked that suggestion, even though it was probably unrealistic to hope it would ever be implemented.

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

Speed has its risks.

It has indeed, even now. Let's try to make sure we don't remove all its rewards while implementing more risks.

[Raidyr]

Livewyr, on 10 September 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

Speed has its risks.

I was under the impression that lights traded armor, weapons, and raw tonnage to mount either for their mobility advantage.

The "lights brawling heavies meta" is hardly a meta. The only reason it even happens is because of bad netcode, which isn't a balance issue. If it does get fixed then Jenners and maybe Raven 3L's will still be brawling by using their mobility to stay under the guns of heavier mechs, something which is part of the dynamic of Mechwarrior. It's balanced by the fact that if they get hit once they take a lot more damage than the person they are brawling with because they got shot by bigger guns and have less armor.

Also anecdotally my Jenner gets wrecked by Cataphracts and larger mechs on an hourly basis. I'm willing to buy that I'm just a bad light pilot or there are some amazing heavy/assault pilots out there but I certainly don't feel like an all-powerful force of robotic nature when 3 UAC/5's or twin gauss core me out in 3 seconds.

Edited by Raidyr, 10 September 2013 - 04:28 AM.

[FupDup]

Public service announcement: collisions and knockdowns are NOT the same thing, stop using them interchangeably. A collision is an event which occurs when two entities come into physical contact. A knockdown is an event which occurs when something falls off of its feet. Collisions actually are still in the game, because currently ramming into another mech on either team will deal a tiny bit of damage (I once got a teamkill from an accidental ram!) to both units and slow them down. The thing that got removed was knockdowns from collisions.

Know the difference.


With that out of the way, my own stance is that I'd like to see some negative consequences for a collision between two mechs but I don't want it to be a knockdown. The specific effects I'd like to see are more damage (scaled accordingly), both units stopping to a halt, and turning both pilot's cockpits into a Harlem shake simulator. That gives people good reason to not smash into each other, and at the same time prevents the "stunlocking" fiasco from the original system. I'll only accept stunlocks if you accept Flamers being able to stunlock as well...as in being able to hold the victim mech in shutdown and not letting him restart his systems.


On a side note, the majority of players in this thread (and any other knockdown thread) are suffering from some serious tunnel vision (perhaps deliberately). They always make it about lights lights lights because they hate mechs with the weakest armor and weakest firepower, but forget to apply the situation to every other class.

One of the claims commonly made is that it would make lights require more skill to utilize. There's nothing inherently wrong with that idea at first glance, but if you dig deeper than the surface you'd realize that avoiding obstacles while driving at 150 kph is a helluva lot harder than if you're trudging along in an assault mech at 65 kph. Basically, you're making one specific class harder to play while the two upper classes see little or no difficulty increase at all. Additionally, lights already often take more skill to do effectively with than fatties. Yeah, I know what you're thinking, "but Fuddy Duddy, hit detection and running around fast and stuff and things!" The cold, hard truth is that experienced shooters in heavies and assaults have little issue hitting lights consistently, even with hit detection not yet perfected. It's not a matter of if they got shot, it's a matter of when. When they do get hit, they feel it a lot harder than anyone else. They can't afford to make a mistake against good opponents, whereas often I can take a face full of long-range fire even in my Catapult and keep on trucking!


One conveniently overlooked additional issue is the impact of knockdowns on the medium class. Currently, they're already known for being the size of heavy mechs with less armor and less firepower, and they can't move as fast as lights. The Hunchback in specific is going to be MURDERED and made extinct by the reintroduction of knockdowns. Most builds on that mech (usually the AC/20 ones) can't possibly go fast enough to outrun a typical heavy or Victor brawler, meaning that the first thing people will do when they see an enemy Hunchie in close combat is ram straight into him and stunlock him while tearing him apart. Other mediums aren't quite as slow, but they're not much better off. Most heavies go over 80 kph (barring things like dakka Jagers) so they can close the distance fairly quickly or wait for the medium to get stuck on terrain. This basically creates a "no brawl zone" for medium mechs if an enemy heavy (or fast Victor) is in the area. You're forcing mediums to sit back and snipe a lot of the time, and the issue with that is that heavies and assaults are better at that in most cases.

Edited by FupDup, 10 September 2013 - 04:38 AM.

[M4NTiC0R3X]

When you collide into wall or moving 'mech you take a small amount of damage based on speed and come to a complete stop until you change the direction of your legs and repress the throttle.

If your internal components are showing there should be a crit chance.

Knockdowns should exist in the form of 20+ ballistic or missile damage, IMO.
(also, LB X AC-10 + would knockdown light chassis)

Edited by M4NTiC0R3X, 10 September 2013 - 04:37 AM.

[DaZur]

I wish for falls to be viewed from the perspective they originated in... i.e... No more out of body experiences if your in FPV.

I completely accept mech, topology and structural collisions as well as DFA but the previous iteration completely broke my immersion shifting to 3PV with falls.

I also think the skill tree should include something to acknowledge a pilots piloting skill level and their ability to recover from falls / collisions.

[Raidyr]

M4NTiC0R3X, on 10 September 2013 - 04:36 AM, said:

Knockdowns should exist in the form of 20+ ballistic or missile damage, IMO.
(also, LB X AC-10 + would knockdown light chassis)

Again, knockdowns being requested not for the value they would add to the game but to punish light players. It's not enough that my Jenner's CT just lost 2/3rds of it's armor to an AC/20 shot, I should also be knocked down and left helpless to take even more hits.

[carl kerensky]

Collisions need to be back in and implemented in the most realistic fashion. For the sake of immersion and providing some in kind of incentive to pilot correctly we need it in. It will change the whole scope of gameplay for the better. Less cheese is always better.

Ck