224 replies to this topic

[Wolfways]

Khobai, on 02 October 2013 - 06:43 AM, said:

Your opinion of how the game should be and how the game actually is are two completely different things.

Ah but it's not just my opinion

From Sarna:

Jenner - "The Jenner's primarily laser armament and phenomenal speed helped to make the the 'Mech extremely well suited as a guerrilla fighter."

Commando - "As early as 2463 Coventry Metal Works (then known as Coventry Defense Conglomerate) introduced with the COM-1A Commando its second own developed BattleMech for the LCAF and one of the first ever, that was suited for reconnaissance."

Spider - "Spiders are generally used as fast strike forces to hit an enemy's rear with lightning speed."

[Karl Streiger]

Khobai, on 02 October 2013 - 06:58 AM, said:

I agree with you on that point. But I feel the solution is to buff mediums, not nerf lights.

a multipler 300-325 rated engine for the Centurions and Hunchbacks may help
But with the incoming Phoenix Mechs - the Hunter Killers will return.... and will release Dragon and Quickdraw from this task

[stjobe]

Wolfways, on 02 October 2013 - 07:05 AM, said:

Commando - "As early as 2463 Coventry Metal Works (then known as Coventry Defense Conglomerate) introduced with the COM-1A Commando its second own developed BattleMech for the LCAF and one of the first ever, that was suited for reconnaissance."

Selective quoting FTW, right?

Funny you didn't quote this part:

Quote

the Commando's profile was radically changed with the introduction of the sophisticated COM-2D variant in 2486, that exchanged the laser weaponry with short range missiles and turned the machine into a striker. With four tons the armor is too light to allow a stand-up fight with heavier enemies, but it excels at hit-and-run tactics and as a scout hunter.

Or this:

Quote

This weapons load can cause a lot of damage for a light 'Mech and makes the Commando an effective striker, especially when used in groups. An often-used tactic for those is to rush upon a single target, concentrate their fire and retreat before the enemy can offer effective resistance.

Edited by stjobe, 02 October 2013 - 07:10 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

stjobe, on 02 October 2013 - 07:10 AM, said:

...

Don't mess with a Commando Pilot - those guys are crazy

[Wolfways]

stjobe, on 02 October 2013 - 06:55 AM, said:

Those are MWO numbers, a game that has very little randomness in its hit location determination.


And as I just showed, you can kill the Jenner faster while missing 2/3rds of your shots (you'd probably kill it even quicker by ST-coring it by accident, but that's another matter).


Unless you show me some math, I'm going to call BS on your "X% this, Atlas% that". I showed you that you could miss two out of three shots and still kill a Jenner through CT-coring faster than you could do the same to an Atlas.

If you want it spelled out, that "miss 2 out of 3 shots" equates to a miss rate of 66%, where the shot either outright misses the target or hits some other location than the CT. If you want to work out how many of those missed shots are needed to kill the Jenner before it's cored through the CT, be my guest.

Now stop arguing from vague suppositions and show us some numbers to support your theory. I'm open to be proven wrong, but you'll have to use math to do it.

You still don't understand and i can't think of a way to make it more simple (Numbers have always confused me ). I can't provide exact numbers for something that is just common sense and the actual numbers don't matter anyway...

[Wolfways]

stjobe, on 02 October 2013 - 07:10 AM, said:

Selective quoting FTW, right?

Funny you didn't quote this part:


Or this:

So when i say lights are mainly strikers, guerrilla fighters, and hit and run mechs you say i'm using selective quoting and then to prove i'm wrong you use quotes that say exactly what i'm saying?
Or did you only choose the commando quote i used because it only says "reconnaissance" and you're desperately trying to disprove anything i say because you think i'm trying to nerf your precious light mechs? Which is ridiculous as i have a Raven-3L and i'm currently working up all the commando's.

[Artgathan]

This, ladies and gentlemen, has been an excellent demonstration of the "Moving Goalposts" style of argumentation.

In short, aiming at lights is hard for bad players and they'd like for them to be easier to kill. Once HSR is working well again, we will see lights disappear again (I never had trouble pegging at light at 270m with an AC/20 from a Highlander when it was working well).

[stjobe]

Wolfways, on 02 October 2013 - 07:19 AM, said:

You still don't understand and i can't think of a way to make it more simple (Numbers have always confused me ). I can't provide exact numbers for something that is just common sense and the actual numbers don't matter anyway...

Soo tempting to smash on that parenthesis... But I won't

Either way, the numbers DO matter, because they can show that what your "common sense" tells you is wrong. In this case, you say that lights gain a greater benefit from the increased armour than heavier 'mechs do, and that their speed makes you hit less often, which also increases their survivability.

The second part is undisputed; speed is life for a light 'mech. The first part though, is what my numbers tries to show you is faulty. The Atlas CT has over three times as much armour as the Jenner's, and it needs three times more hits to core - which means you can destroy three Jenners with the same amount of shots you need to destroy a single Atlas - or you could miss 2/3rds of your shots and still destroy the Jenner in the same time you'd be able to destroy the Atlas.

Since the ratio of armour increase is linear (1:2) from TT to MWO, this holds true in TT as well as in MWO; you need three times more hits to CT core an Atlas as compared to a Jenner in both games.

The conclusion is that it's not the armour increase that makes lights more survivable in MWO, it's actually the one thing people hold on to for dear life: That we hit where we aim, since that also means we miss if we don't aim right.

A small, fast-moving target that moves erratically is harder to hit, and that's what makes light survive. If you do manage to hit them, they're not any more survivable in MWO than they are in TT relative to their heavier brethren.

Which is a long and arduous way of again saying "thanks for the explanation; you're still wrong"

Wolfways, on 02 October 2013 - 07:30 AM, said:

Or did you only choose the commando quote i used because it only says "reconnaissance"

Your quote about the Commando suggests that it's a recon 'mech; it's not. The standard variant is the 2D, not the 1A, and it's a striker; built to do combat, and quite effective at it - especially in packs.

That's all I was trying to point out.

[FupDup]

I swear to god this {Scrap} is never going to end until every last light mech has been hunted to extinction and crucified on a burning cross. That might sound fun to some people at first glance, but really it isn't so fun if you take the time to think of the consequences. Yes, there are hit detection issues, and those make life annoying, but we can't use unintentional netcode issues as something to balance around.


One of these consequences is that lights are normally the mechs running around and capping points. Without them, this role gets forced upon mediums (the next fastest class) and maybe even fast heavies. Capping is currently a ridiculously boring, tedious job that awards utterly pathetic payment, so you don't wanna do capping unless it's absolutely necessary to win the match. Even with the current state of lights, I sometimes have to stick around and cap for my lazy teammates while driving my Kintaro. Until they make capping enjoyable and rewarding to do, I don't want to be forced into that role with my mediums or heavies.


Additionally, if all lights were replaced by mediums and heavies, there would be a lot more firepower on the field. Basically, people would die faster, and this includes assault pilots. The harder to hit nature of lights seems quite annoying at first, but what you have to realize is that they also OUTPUT far less damage in return. If you turn a corner and meet a Jagerbomb or Dakkamets or whatever, you're gonna have a really bad time and might not even live to walk away from the encounter. If you meet a Spider...you're going to take a few medium laser or medium pulse laser hits. I dunno about you, but I'd rather miss a few of my shots against a circlejerking light rather than go toe-to-toe with a heavy or assault brawler (especially because I'm grinding Kintaros right now and they are big targets).


Lastly, since people would gravitate (even more) towards the slower classes, the meta would become more static and "cookie cutter" than it is now because there would be no rascal lights to catch you off guard and change the flow of combat. The antics of those little hooligans help prevent things from getting too stale.

Edited by FupDup, 02 October 2013 - 07:58 AM.

[Wolfways]

stjobe, on 02 October 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

The first part though, is what my numbers tries to show you is faulty. The Atlas CT has over three times as much armour as the Jenner's, and it needs three times more hits to core - which means you can destroy three Jenners with the same amount of shots you need to destroy a single Atlas - or you could miss 2/3rds of your shots and still destroy the Jenner in the same time you'd be able to destroy the Atlas.

If there was an equal chance of hitting the ct on both mechs then yes. But there isn't.
But i never said it wasn't easier to destroy the Jenner. Obviously it is. But it's harder to kill a Jenner compared to an Atlas in MWO compared to the difficulty in TT. i.e. the Atlas suffers more from direct fire than the Jenner does.

[Joseph Mallan]

Wolfways, on 02 October 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

If there was an equal chance of hitting the ct on both mechs then yes. But there isn't.
But i never said it wasn't easier to destroy the Jenner. Obviously it is. But it's harder to kill a Jenner compared to an Atlas in MWO compared to the difficulty in TT. i.e. the Atlas suffers more from direct fire than the Jenner does.

Actually there is an equal chance to hit the CT. You just have to be a better gunner Wolf. Speed is armor is a very old CBT axiom.

[Wolfways]

FupDup, on 02 October 2013 - 07:52 AM, said:

I swear to god this {Scrap} is never going to end until every last light mech has been hunted to extinction and crucified on a burning cross.

I'm not sure if you didn't read my OP or just didn't understand it...

[FupDup]

Wolfways, on 02 October 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

I'm not sure if you didn't read my OP or just didn't understand it...

You're reducing the armor on all mechs except assaults, and the degree of armor reduction increases as weight class decreases. The implications of that aren't very difficult to figure out.

[Wolfways]

Joseph Mallan, on 02 October 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

Actually there is an equal chance to hit the CT. You just have to be a better gunner Wolf. Speed is armor is a very old CBT axiom.

But if you assume a player with average skill then it is easier to reliably hit the Atlas ct consecutively than it is to do the same with a Jenner, because the target (Jenner ct) is moving faster making the player more likely to miss the ct and hit another component. This is why to hit the Jenner ct you need to be a better gunner

[stjobe]

Wolfways, on 02 October 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

If there was an equal chance of hitting the ct on both mechs then yes. But there isn't.

The chance of hitting can be 65% less and it would still be easier to kill the Jenner, that's what I'm trying to get you to understand.

Wolfways, on 02 October 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

But i never said it wasn't easier to destroy the Jenner. Obviously it is. But it's harder to kill a Jenner compared to an Atlas in MWO compared to the difficulty in TT. i.e. the Atlas suffers more from direct fire than the Jenner does.

No, the Jenner took the exact same ratio of shots to kill in TT as in MWO: One third as many shots need to hit the Jenner CT as needs to hit the Atlas CT.

If anything, it's arguably actually harder to kill a Jenner in TT than in MWO since the to-hit numbers in TT are capped at 12 (try rolling 13+ on two dice, but you always have a chance of making that one-in-a-million shot in MWO).

Edited by stjobe, 02 October 2013 - 08:25 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Wolfways, on 02 October 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

But if you assume a player with average skill then it is easier to reliably hit the Atlas ct consecutively than it is to do the same with a Jenner, because the target (Jenner ct) is moving faster making the player more likely to miss the ct and hit another component. This is why to hit the Jenner ct you need to be a better gunner

As it should be. If you are not a good shot you will probably miss a faster Mech. It is the game mechanic that simulates the movement modifiers that make hitting faster Mechs on TT a drag. I'm a good shot, not a great shot a good one. I don't have a problem with Lights having double armor even i they can devour for lunch.

Really... Eat Me is censored?

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 02 October 2013 - 08:30 AM.

[Wolfways]

FupDup, on 02 October 2013 - 08:20 AM, said:

You're reducing the armor on all mechs except assaults, and the degree of armor reduction increases as weight class decreases. The implications of that aren't very difficult to figure out.

Okay so you didn't understand.
I never mentioned reducing any armour (from the original values) and said that if PGI wanted to keep the time to kill a Jenner compared to the time to kill an Atlas equal to TT (which they obviously don't) then the armour values would need to have been increased incrementally and gave an example of what i meant (with random numbers).
The "random hit location" is why lights are about as hard to kill in MWO as in TT, while assaults are easier.

[mike29tw]

Wolfways, on 02 October 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

But if you assume a player with average skill then it is easier to reliably hit the Atlas ct consecutively than it is to do the same with a Jenner, because the target (Jenner ct) is moving faster making the player more likely to miss the ct and hit another component. This is why to hit the Jenner ct you need to be a better gunner

You need to be a better gunner to hit a Jenner, but you also need to be a better pilot to survive in one, which means skill matters a lot in this game as it should be.

[FupDup]

Wolfways, on 02 October 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:

Okay so you didn't understand.
I never mentioned reducing any armour (from the original values) and said that if PGI wanted to keep the time to kill a Jenner compared to the time to kill an Atlas equal to TT (which they obviously don't) then the armour values would need to have been increased incrementally and gave an example of what i meant (with random numbers).
The "random hit location" is why lights are about as hard to kill in MWO as in TT, while assaults are easier.

Okay, so it would appear that I did misread the % increase portion (I assumed you meant remove doubled armor and then apply the specified increases). Regardless, the end result is still the exact same so it's just a matter of semantics.

[Wolfways]

stjobe, on 02 October 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

The chance of hitting can be 65% less and it would still be easier to kill the Jenner, that's what I'm trying to get you to understand.

Yeah, i get that, but it has nothing to do with what i'm talking about so i have no idea why you keep bringing it up.

Quote

No, the Jenner took the exact same ratio of shots to kill in TT as in MWO:

But the Atlas doesn't.
I really didn't think it was this hard to understand