70 replies to this topic

[Tombstoner]

Livewyr, on 15 September 2013 - 05:07 AM, said:

weapon versus armor. if you make a bunch of awesome killer weapons, you might as well not have armor.
however since this is an armor game that is intended to have engagements last more than a few seconds, you should probably consider the balance between armor and firepower and not just what enables you to kill the fastest. this is not CoD HC Mode

I must disagree. As you know weapon fire rate was increased 2.5 X but damage wasn't adjusted down to compensate:huge mistake. Later armor is increased to 2x to compensate but alters intra weapon balance. Over all damage output is higher relative to TT with no RNG hit location. On top of that, armor values dont take into consideration the interaction between size and speed. Armor is over all fundamental weaker and why spiders and jenners can go 1-1 with an atlas and have a good chance of winning, lag shield not withstanding. this is PGI vision for the game. more armor is always better, but lights receive far more protection per tone then the atlas. Armor is massively nerfed relative to TT so a COD comparison is ok.

MWO has skill based targeting, basically its COD without the COF. with armor as week as it is you would never take the weaker weapons. it's all about killing asap in the 30-90 seconds you have to live. just like COD. you live by not trading damage.

If people want weapon diversity the OP is correct and weaker weapons need to be buffed. otherwise its all gonna be the same FOTM.

The game designers have a FPS background and i think want to tap into that crowd. MWO is morphing into a FPS amalgamation of MW,CS and such. just give it time. in fact currently they think weapon diversity is ok cause PGI does in fact make comparisons with CS and think 4 weapons are used competitively in CS vs.12 in MWO is good.

[Ahja]

Good lord this is the easy part of this game design. Weapons damage to armor and heat was all worked out 30 years ago. It all worked fine on paper and then in most of the Mechwarrior games. So why is this the biggest problem MWO has? Is it this concept of "balance"? Because the way weapons heat and armor are in this system you cant balance without unbalancing.

[Hythos]

Tombstoner, on 18 September 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

The game designers have a FPS background and i think want to tap into that crowd. MWO is morphing into a FPS amalgamation of MW,CS and such. just give it time. in fact currently they think weapon diversity is ok cause PGI does in fact make comparisons with CS and think 4 weapons are used competitively in CS vs.12 in MWO is good.

No reason to think that. They outright said they need to attract FPS players, which is why they needed to add a "Sniper rifle" to MWO, so that FPS players have a frame of reference with something that's familiar. Too bad they feel they must go after these people, 'cause they won't contribute / buy-in, and will more than likely play a week, maybe a month, then quit, because it's not a side-strafing FPS like they're used to............ OH wait. PGI did say they would add that.. and didn't call it "side step", as far as I recall.

[Baba Yogi]

Krivvan, on 17 September 2013 - 09:34 PM, said:

The problem with buffing things rather nerfing is that people already complain about the game being too fast and mechs going down too quickly. You may be able to achieve balance by buffing rather than nerfing, but it would also mean more players going down in seconds.

Although people going down in seconds is more related to 12 v 12. Most of the time i feel like i am being dragged in the current. Making big plays are exponentially harder now.

[Bacl]

Vassago Rain, on 16 September 2013 - 02:37 AM, said:

You mean 'it takes longer to kill people in boring conflicts?' No matter how bad you make the guns, you're gonna end up with a gold standard that kills faster than the rest. It's better to have multiple superior builds than just One True Build, because that's predictable, but having only weaksauce builds is even worse. I don't like the nerfhammer approach to fun. We're heading towards a future where you get to pick between ineffective AC5s, dice rolling UAC5s, and maybe the occasional LRMboat, because all other options are subpar. It doesn't matter if you're a brawler or a sniper - you take these three weapons. Why can't we have more choice? More choice is strategic. I should have to consider my role and build around it, not brawl with UACs because LBXs and SRMs are horrible at actually brawling.

Well i have a new build on my Stalker 3F that consists of 2 PPC's, 2 larges lasers and 2 meds lasers and few other things ( wont give you the full build ITS MINE! ), but with the weapons stated above i still get called a noob because i alpha the whole thing.
Really?!
By the time i get out of cover alpha everything and backup (2-3 seconds max) the 3 UAC5 jaggers murders 2 or 3 torso parts, a bit on the head and generally one arm because i twist. Have to admit tho it was satisfying destroying the shoulder of that jager tho, since i m a alpha noob.

3UAC5 jagers use XL engines guys for gte the center torso !

[Bacl]

Hythos, on 17 September 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:

I knew people from FPS games like Bukakefield and ModernBorefare were dumb... so thank you for showing how much.
Ok, I wll use sml wrds 4 u! <3
PGI sais to mak up sum stry b/c they wnt plyrs 2 b hpy. Ppl frm FPS gms r 2 l33t, n n00bs r 2 dum. PGI sais wnt moar FPS plyrs, so PGI mak FPS sn1pr gam w/GR n sais 'GR sn1pr rfl nao so MW n BF n COD plyrs can ply 2' instd of sais 'GR nao hs dly b/c r 4 blx duh b/c we wnt it 2'. Wud PGI sais GR nao dly 4 blx, is GTG...

Crud.. I almost had that spelled out correctly; I forgot people like use AOL-speak GTG as "got to go" MLOS (mommy looking over shoulder) instead of the age-old "good to go". I hope this clears things up for you in a manner you might more easily understand <3

Oh boy be right back... Ok i have my grandpa's glasses and a freshly brewed coffee, lets see...

(20 minutes later) Banging head on keyboard because i cant undertsand it*

[DirePhoenix]

Vassago Rain, on 16 September 2013 - 02:37 AM, said:

You mean 'it takes longer to kill people in boring conflicts?' No matter how bad you make the guns, you're gonna end up with a gold standard that kills faster than the rest.

I don't know how you play, but the only 'boring conflicts' I have are where I get one-shot at the start of the match. If I'm alive, I'm not bored.

[Tombstoner]

Hythos, on 18 September 2013 - 09:30 AM, said:

No reason to think that. They outright said they need to attract FPS players, which is why they needed to add a "Sniper rifle" to MWO, so that FPS players have a frame of reference with something that's familiar. Too bad they feel they must go after these people, 'cause they won't contribute / buy-in, and will more than likely play a week, maybe a month, then quit, because it's not a side-strafing FPS like they're used to............ OH wait. PGI did say they would add that.. and didn't call it "side step", as far as I recall.

Side stepping...omg. yea i can see it happening as more of the FPS crowd enters the game. that's what they will be asking for..... why cant we side step? this game would be so awesome if we could. my mechs a biped not a tank. i can do it why cant my atlas. yea i can see it happening.

[DirePhoenix]

Tombstoner, on 19 September 2013 - 06:29 AM, said:

Side stepping...omg. yea i can see it happening as more of the FPS crowd enters the game. that's what they will be asking for..... why cant we side step? this game would be so awesome if we could. my mechs a biped not a tank. i can do it why cant my atlas. yea i can see it happening.

I believe in one of the NGNG podcasts one of the staff (I want to say Garth?) mentioned that sidestepping may be a good way to counter someone charging you when they add collisions back in.

[Tombstoner]

DirePhoenix, on 19 September 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

I believe in one of the NGNG podcasts one of the staff (I want to say Garth?) mentioned that sidestepping may be a good way to counter someone charging you when they add collisions back in.

Yea.. .side stepping... so not gona be used to "counter" charging.... more likely it will reenforce sniping/camping.styles of game play.

[Mazikar]

I find it interesting how many people post that I want Overpowered weapons to remain... I want working weapons to remain, I want under powered weapons to be buffed. What is a working weapon? Right now ... AC 10, AC 5, Med. Laser, Large Laser, AC 2. Sadly that's all you will find on my 17 owned mechs with one exception, my founders Atlas has a AC 20.