74 replies to this topic

[DaZur]

Joseph Mallan, on 13 September 2013 - 10:55 AM, said:

If it crunches... it was a toenail. Now quit thinking so much and enjoy the flavor of a great dog!

Oh to the contrary... I'm a rural boy from an old country family (Polish)... A toe-nail would be a tasty alternative to some of the eclectic food stuffs I've been subjected to through the course of my youth.

[Suprentus]

Jonathan Paine, on 13 September 2013 - 09:32 AM, said:

Suprentus:
1. Apart from the weird ghost heat penalty applying randomly to weapons, only the gauss had complicated mechanic added to it.

2. UAC5: Dislike your solution, apart from one thing. Yes, players should be in control of when the weapon double fires, and only then should the jamming penalty be applied. Keep the UAC5 different from AC5 in tonnage and crits, or the AC5 becomes POINTLESS and I DONT WANT LESS WEAPONS.

3. Ghost heat - fine, but your solution of random weird effects do not seem like a simpler solution. A simpler solution would be to stop alpha strikes from having perfect convergence, while letting chain fired weapons with at least 0.5 seconds between each shot retain accuracy.

4. Gauss rifle needs a charge time. It also needs a shorter recycling time to compensate, and should be able to retain its charged state much longer. Only in its charged state should the gauss rifle explode if critically hit.

5. ECM is still ridiculous.

6. Why ever use single heat sinks?

7. Most weapons that becomes supremely popular do so because they are op. Unfortunately, PGI seems to have no concept on how to tune weapons gradually. This has led to LRM armageddon (several times) as well as the rise and fall of the PPC. (Not to mention low heat SL/ML and unrestricted engines back in pre-history....).

TL;DR:

Suprentus suggests MWO changes that combine complicated coding with un-attractive changes to weapons, dumbing down the game. I disagree.

1. ECM and Double Heat Sinks are still more complicated than they need to be. It's not just Gauss and ghost heat, although those are plenty complicated on their own.

2. Um...my idea is exactly what you want, so what's the problem? I didn't mean make the UAC/5 identical to the AC/5 in tonnage and crits, if that's what you're thinking. I don't want them to change the tonnage and crits. I meant make them identical in function, except UAC/5 gets a double tap mechanic. In fact, if I understand correctly, that's exactly what PGI is going to do.

3. Why not? If I overstress the engine of my car, I know it's going to stall. If I draw too much power from my wall with an appliance, the circuit breaker will trip. It's a pretty easy to understand concept, I think. I think we've all seen the Starship Enterprise's systems go a little haywire when Scotty's yelling "I'm givin it all she's got, cap'n!" I'm not sure how I feel about the convergence idea, though. I've heard it in many iterations before, from cone of fire (which I don't agree with at all), to a simple non-convergence mechanic.

4. Why? Why does it need a charge time? It was never OP. Those that believed it to be OP have obviously never used a simple AC/10 to great effect. In fact, it was often debatable whether to choose an AC/20 or a Gauss Rifle, as they had very similar tonnages, but different properties. I liked that dynamic, and found it to be a fair and balanced system. Choosing one over the other was entirely dependent on what you wanted to get out of the 'Mech. A charge time isn't necessary whatsoever.

5. Maybe. It should have never been an Angel ECM to begin with, IMO. It's not as bad as it once was, though. It can be combated.

6. I wasn't talking about Single Heat Sinks...

7. No, most weapons that become supremely popular do so because they are either easy to use, or have the most obviously apparent perks. I mean, sure, some weapons are genuinely OP at certain points, but for the large part, very few were. If you want to see OP LRMs, recall back in closed beta when they were fire-and-forget. Now, you can avoid LRMs. What I loved about the game, despite PGI's total lack of vision and ambition, was that I had about 20 or so 'Mechs in my Mechbay, all mastered, and all built differently, despite whatever the current meta was at the time. That's gone now. The recent Gauss and ghost heat changes render at least 1/3 of them either useless, or just way bigger pain in the ***** than they need to be.

I think some of the things you disagree with are misunderstandings on your part. Also, I don't see how any of what I suggested dumbs anything down.

Edited by Suprentus, 13 September 2013 - 11:06 AM.

[Tempered]

Suprentus, on 12 September 2013 - 02:14 AM, said:

To use a video game example from my earlier post, take some of the classic space sims like X-Wing, Tie Fighter, or Freespace.



It has a simple and easy to understand energy management system. At any time, you can divert energy back and forth between engines, lasers, and shields, as well as choosing which area to strengthen your shields, and the effects of doing so are simple. It's really easy to understand that engine power affects your speed, laser power affects your laser recharge rate, and shield power affects your shield recharge rate. Where it becomes complex is when you're constantly optimizing your energy for your current situation. In the thick of battle, you find yourself pressing buttons frantically to constantly adapt your ship to the situation. In my opinion, it actually makes the game more fun.

This system doesn't need unintuitive controls or hard to understand mathematical formulas to accomplish this effect, and it's not "oversimplified" either.

My god how I miss that game!

[Maarve]

Endgame long range - ppc - gauss vs **** poor short range . Half the wepons of a regular mech title = unbalanced **** with stupid mechanics to appease the derps that don't ******* know any better

[Suprentus]

Maarvelous, on 13 September 2013 - 04:44 PM, said:

Endgame long range - ppc - gauss vs **** poor short range . Half the wepons of a regular mech title = unbalanced **** with stupid mechanics to appease the derps that don't ******* know any better

...what?

[Alpha087]

Suprentus, on 11 September 2013 - 02:02 AM, said:

My opinion is to completely rip out all the overcomplicated mechanics and start over. I know PGI invested months into tweaking everything into oblivion, and it's a hard thing to give that up, but they really need to cut their losses here and start thinking simple.

It's a really good thing you're not in charge then, isn't it? If this game was dumbed down it would just be a generic shooter with mechs. In fact, this game is really a lot more on the simplistic side when compared to the old MechWarrior games, so... You're really just playing the wrong game if you think it's too complicated.

What is complicated about learning to put together a build that doesn't rely on cheesing with a bunch of one type of weapon? Or is it having to hold down a mouse button to shoot a Gauss rifle?

Edited by Alpha087, 13 September 2013 - 05:31 PM.

[Hythos]

Alpha087, on 13 September 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:

What is complicated about learning to put together a build that doesn't rely on cheesing with a bunch of one type of weapon? Or is it having to hold down a mouse button to shoot an Ultra Autocannon/5?

Fixed!

[Core2029]

Joseph Mallan, on 13 September 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

That kind of balance will force me out of MWO.

At over 12,000 posts I'm willing to bet you're wrong.

[Core2029]

Devils Advocate, on 13 September 2013 - 10:50 AM, said:

I'll reword what I was trying to say. It was pretty poorly worded anyway.

If anybody can equip anything they want and we don't make an effort to limit alphas or slow down Gauss rifles you end up with the game we had before, which is 90% twitch and 10% loadout. If 6 PPCs coming out of an Awesome isn't an AWP I'm not sure what is. Oh, but wait... you wanted some kind of (apparently not as complicated) system where your screen fuzzies up or you get weird heating issues when you fire a bunch of them at once to compensate, right? Another complicated system that wouldn't actually stop anyone from murdering you with one shot at 600 meters but would instead immerse the person firing in a world of wurring robot parts and energy crackles. We're still in counterstrike territory. I'll explain what I mean when I say that further down.

Gauss rifles have always been broken. Go find an archive of the forums from closed beta an take a gander. You must have been around long enough to realize they needed a rework. Now they serve a purpose and fill a role beyond simply being the best at everything in the entire game. A charge on the Gauss rifle isn't "complicated" either, it's just an attempt to make the weapon less non-specific in its application. It's still too good at brawling but at least it has a downside now.

I've used double Gauss and 6 PPC mechs for a year now and I always felt like I was playing Counter Strike. If I caught you off guard you were dead, if you caught me, and you had a similar loadout as me, I was dead. That shouldn't be the way mechwarrior works. Yeah, you should probably get murdered for being caught completely with your pants down, but two shots in 3 or 4 seconds shouldn't ever core an assault, and nobody should have to worry about having their core blown out in 3 shots from 700 meters while moving at speed between cover. That's the point of all these changes, and whether or not you agree with the changes they have changed the game as they intended to change the game. There's a little less losing your right torso with one volley and a little more dedicating yourself to sniping or brawling without just taking the biggest loadout.

Good response. The only thing I would comment on is twitch vs. load-out. MWO is a twitch game on it's face and I believe that's what it should be because they're quite fun. I would never compare it to the twitch skills required for Counter Strike or for us old timers, Quake 2 rocket jumping attacks, but at it's heart it's still very twitch based. I couldn't begin to guess what percentages that comes out to vs. load-out. Nobody can as it's a little subjective.

I still like everything the OP proposed, including the personality part. Everything being equal isn't always where the fun is found.

[Suprentus]

Alpha087, on 13 September 2013 - 05:29 PM, said:

It's a really good thing you're not in charge then, isn't it? If this game was dumbed down it would just be a generic shooter with mechs. In fact, this game is really a lot more on the simplistic side when compared to the old MechWarrior games, so... You're really just playing the wrong game if you think it's too complicated.

What is complicated about learning to put together a build that doesn't rely on cheesing with a bunch of one type of weapon? Or is it having to hold down a mouse button to shoot a Gauss rifle?

Oh look, another guy who hasn't even bothered reading my OP, and instead latches onto the presupposition that I'm talking about dumbing the game down.

If you're not even going to put in the effort of reading, then why put in the effort of responding?

[YueFei]

Devils Advocate, on 13 September 2013 - 10:50 AM, said:

I'll reword what I was trying to say. It was pretty poorly worded anyway.

If anybody can equip anything they want and we don't make an effort to limit alphas or slow down Gauss rifles you end up with the game we had before, which is 90% twitch and 10% loadout. If 6 PPCs coming out of an Awesome isn't an AWP I'm not sure what is. Oh, but wait... you wanted some kind of (apparently not as complicated) system where your screen fuzzies up or you get weird heating issues when you fire a bunch of them at once to compensate, right? Another complicated system that wouldn't actually stop anyone from murdering you with one shot at 600 meters but would instead immerse the person firing in a world of wurring robot parts and energy crackles. We're still in counterstrike territory. I'll explain what I mean when I say that further down.

Gauss rifles have always been broken. Go find an archive of the forums from closed beta an take a gander. You must have been around long enough to realize they needed a rework. Now they serve a purpose and fill a role beyond simply being the best at everything in the entire game. A charge on the Gauss rifle isn't "complicated" either, it's just an attempt to make the weapon less non-specific in its application. It's still too good at brawling but at least it has a downside now.

I've used double Gauss and 6 PPC mechs for a year now and I always felt like I was playing Counter Strike. If I caught you off guard you were dead, if you caught me, and you had a similar loadout as me, I was dead. That shouldn't be the way mechwarrior works. Yeah, you should probably get murdered for being caught completely with your pants down, but two shots in 3 or 4 seconds shouldn't ever core an assault, and nobody should have to worry about having their core blown out in 3 shots from 700 meters while moving at speed between cover. That's the point of all these changes, and whether or not you agree with the changes they have changed the game as they intended to change the game. There's a little less losing your right torso with one volley and a little more dedicating yourself to sniping or brawling without just taking the biggest loadout.

I think they could've accomplished that design goal with a simpler fix though. Lower heat cap and raise the dissipation rate. You would get less burst damage, but an overall higher sustained firing rate. A faster paced game, but longer time-to-kill.

[Suprentus]

YueFei, on 14 September 2013 - 12:36 AM, said:

I think they could've accomplished that design goal with a simpler fix though. Lower heat cap and raise the dissipation rate. You would get less burst damage, but an overall higher sustained firing rate. A faster paced game, but longer time-to-kill.

At the very least, I think that idea is worth trying on a larger scale than their own offices, and onto the test servers. We are supposed to be beta testers, after all. I'd be really interested to see how that would play out.

[YueFei]

Suprentus, on 14 September 2013 - 12:47 AM, said:

At the very least, I think that idea is worth trying on a larger scale than their own offices, and onto the test servers. We are supposed to be beta testers, after all. I'd be really interested to see how that would play out.

The idea is from Koniving. He has a thread with all kinds of information about it on the forums somewhere which you can read if you're interested in the details. Do a search for Mustrum's thread on "Paul: Heat Neutral mechs are not a problem", the thread title was something like that. Koniving breaks down the way an "alpha strike" actually plays out in the TT in "real-time". Mechs don't fire all of their weapons simultaneously for an Alpha Strike. Rather, in an Alpha Strike a Mech fires all of its weapons over a 10-second period of time.

The gist of it is to lower the heat cap to 30, and make DHS true double heat sinks. That heat cap value of 30 could be tuned higher or lower to achieve the desired allowable burst damage potential. Two ERPPCs would be an instant shutdown. And we could make shutdowns harsher and longer-lasting than they are now, so a shot like that is a gamble: if you don't kill your enemy with that shot, he's can stroll right up and head-shot you. The thing is, with true double heatsinks, you'd dissipate heat faster, so you could chain-fire the ERPPCs and sustain that fire at a faster rate than we can now.

[Suprentus]

Suprentus, on 13 September 2013 - 12:26 AM, said:

https://twitter.com/...246199259566080

Well how about that? They actually had the same idea concerning the UAC/5 as I did. I'm actually a little impressed.

Now if only they can apply this kind of mentality with the rest of the game...

...why did I even have a sliver of hope anymore.

"It should have always been an AC5 that you could double tap at a risk."

Oh really? Looks to me like you guys don't know how double tapping works. To double tap, you pull the trigger twice. You know how you can replicate double tapping? It's a magical and elusive technique, passed down through generations of the most devout Chinese monks, but I will share it with you today!

Here it is...



Seriously, why does double tapping occur from holding the mouse button in? Double tapping should not occur from holding the mouse button in. Why would anyone think that's a good idea? You guys really just think that changing two numbers will fix it when it's the mechanic itself that's the problem? Again, all it does it encourage the use of macros to get around it.

A simple double click. That's all I'm asking for.

Edited by Suprentus, 17 September 2013 - 10:55 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Double Click is not okay. It's kinda like boating weapons, except instead of weapons, you boat clicks.