427 replies to this topic

[Nryrony]

KingCobra, on 11 October 2013 - 12:41 PM, said:

use it against the OP lights in the game.

I think you are playing an entirely different game then I do.

The Spider needs a hitreg/hitbox fix thats for shure.

But to buff Heavys and Assaults so that they can deal better with Lights? Did you even unlock your arms? or used streaks before? Do you even know that streaks and BAP exists?

And whats with the technical readout 3058 pic, sure the Bushwacker is a nice design but I don't exactly get your point on that...

Just FWY I think I played almost any MW game since the crappy SNES game - however this doesn't change a thing about opinions on balance...

[KingCobra]

Nryrony, on 11 October 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

I think you are playing an entirely different game then I do.

The Spider needs a hitreg/hitbox fix thats for shure.

But to buff Heavys and Assaults so that they can deal better with Lights? Did you even unlock your arms? or used streaks before? Do you even know that streaks and BAP exists?

And whats with the technical readout 3058 pic, sure the Bushwacker is a nice design but I don't exactly get your point on that...

Just FWY I think I played almost any MW game since the crappy SNES game - however this doesn't change a thing about opinions on balance...

Umm NO im playing the same game as you when I do play and I have been here since the start of closed beta and I use and test everything in the game from multiple pug and premade accounts so what is your point? What I stated is my point of view on helping balance the game and let players play more than one or two mech types assaults or assaults hahahaha. It is just a picture of a medium because that's what this topic is about correct? mediums? I stated what I thought would get players to use mediums and other class mechs many times im sure you will figure it out in your own way and with your own opinions..

[Nryrony]

KingCobra, on 11 October 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

It is just a picture of a medium because that's what this topic is about correct? mediums? I stated what I thought would get players to use mediums and other class mechs many times im sure you will figure it out in your own way and with your own opinions..

Oh I never said a thing against mediums, did you even read my post and that quote?

I do think mediums need a buff, mostly a bit of speed and twist speed, the Kintaro and the Blackjack are close to there where all mediums should be.

All I said that was that the last thing this game needs is a buff of Assaults and Heavys on speed/mobility/agility.

This would not only hurt lights but mediums as well...

But to quote you

KingCobra, on 11 October 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

im sure you will figure it out in your own way and with your own opinions..

[Dirkdaring]

Lefty Lucy, on 09 October 2013 - 10:55 AM, said:

Nope. People will just take more lights.

Which is why you need to only be able to have a certain # of a class a mech per match. 3 lights, 3 medium, 3 heavy, 3 assault. Sure, you can play a light if you want but you may have a 4-5 minute wait while medium is instant.

Edited by Dirkdaring, 11 October 2013 - 01:22 PM.

[KingCobra]

Nryrony, on 11 October 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

Oh I never said a thing against mediums, did you even read my post and that quote?

I do think mediums need a buff, mostly a bit of speed and twist speed, the Kintaro and the Blackjack are close to there where all mediums should be.

All I said that was that the last thing this game needs is a buff of Assaults and Heavys on speed/mobility/agility.

This would not only hurt lights but mediums as well...

But to quote you

First you have to understand the maneuverability/agility buff would not be a straight % across the board for the 3 classes of mechs I would go say 20% buff for mediums-10% buff for heavies-5% buff for assaults that way it still would be balanced with lights still having the most mobility/agility equaling 100%.

Dirkdaring, on 11 October 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

Which is why you need to only be able to have a certain # of a class a mech per match. 3 lights, 3 medium, 3 heavy, 3 assault. Sure, you can play a light if you want but you may have a 4-5 minute wait while medium is instant.

I have agreed with this idea in every topic or post I have read letting the MM match up tonnages as close as it can to balance out the mech classes in battles. I would do this for pug MM only premades like I have said many times need there own separate queues.

[Vassago Rain]

Dirkdaring, on 11 October 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

Which is why you need to only be able to have a certain # of a class a mech per match. 3 lights, 3 medium, 3 heavy, 3 assault. Sure, you can play a light if you want but you may have a 4-5 minute wait while medium is instant.

I'm not gonna play the game if I'm forced to run robots I don't own, don't like, and are outright worse than the other choices. This was the primary reason run hot or die never caught on outside the special interest groups.

[Nryrony]

KingCobra, on 11 October 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:

First you have to understand the maneuverability/agility buff would not be a straight % across the board for the 3 classes of mechs I would go say 20% buff for mediums-10% buff for heavies-5% buff for assaults that way it still would be balanced with lights still having the most mobility/agility equaling 100%.

I wouldn't go with a straight % buff too, I would increase all mediums top speed to a maximum of roughly 120, buff lights depending on chassis and engine to 180+, give the game some bumb tolerance, since with the "new" climb system (and jjs) these issues exist and they hurt fast mechs more then slower mechs.

And if anything at all, Heavys and Assaults would require a negative speed and twist speed buff. That would make articulated arms more useful in the process - well they would require some slow down too but that would be a solution.

Opinions are different and this is why we should discuss them instead of posting nonsense like you apparently do at times.

KingCobra, on 11 October 2013 - 12:14 PM, said:

It would seem you cannot help this topic by your idiotic comments but then again your age or IQ might be 2?

Edited by Nryrony, 11 October 2013 - 01:40 PM.

[Accursed Richards]

Karl Streiger, on 11 October 2013 - 05:45 AM, said:

the upcomming 55ts will make Dragon and Quickdraw obsolete. I'm pretty sure that I mothballed my Dragons for the Shadow Hawks

That's a bit premature. A quick look at the Phoenix page suggests that the Shadow Hawk is close in size to the Thunderbolt, while the Wolverine & Griffin are as tall as the Battlemaster and only slightly less bulky. I hope for the sake of those who paid money to get them that those shots aren't to scale. And even then, there's no telling which of them will be favoured by the fickle CT hitbox gods.

[FupDup]

Accursed Richards, on 11 October 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

That's a bit premature. A quick look at the Phoenix page suggests that the Shadow Hawk is close in size to the Thunderbolt, while the Wolverine & Griffin are as tall as the Battlemaster and only slightly less bulky. I hope for the sake of those who paid money to get them that those shots aren't to scale. And even then, there's no telling which of them will be favoured by the fickle CT hitbox gods.

Concept art is almost never to scale. However, despite that, I have guesstimated that the Shadow Hawk is fairly close in height to the Kintaro (which is taller than any heavy barring the Quickdraw). The Thunderbolt appears to be roughly Centurion height if you compare its size versus a car prop.

[Nryrony]

Anyway I'm excited seeing all of them in the field.

[Accursed Richards]

FupDup, on 11 October 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

Concept art is almost never to scale. However, despite that, I have guesstimated that the Shadow Hawk is fairly close in height to the Kintaro (which is taller than any heavy barring the Quickdraw). The Thunderbolt appears to be roughly Centurion height if you compare its size versus a car prop.

I know (and said) that the concept art proves nothing. But based on the ginormous mediums we have now, it's alarmingly plausible, you must admit.

[Ghogiel]

Cragger, on 11 October 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

Calculating surface area of a 3d model is not difficult as the tools can do it for you. From there is is simply a matter of scaling until the surface area meets the proper value thus determining the height.

The 3d model cannot have any intersecting geometry or open edges. It needs to be a single continuous surface. Which the game models are not. Though you can create a new model that ticks all those boxes fairly easy if you know how.

[FupDup]

Accursed Richards, on 11 October 2013 - 01:47 PM, said:

I know (and said) that the concept art proves nothing. But based on the ginormous mediums we have now, it's alarmingly plausible, you must admit.

It's also plausible based on the Twitter screenshots from Russ:

We can't tell for sure due to the Shawk not touching the hangar, but my own experiment with a Kintaro revealed that the Kint is just slightly taller than the hangar (when touching it). The Shawk doesn't seem very far off, but we don't have any exact results yet and probably won't until it's too late.

Edited by FupDup, 11 October 2013 - 01:52 PM.

[Charons Little Helper]

Dirkdaring, on 11 October 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

Which is why you need to only be able to have a certain # of a class a mech per match. 3 lights, 3 medium, 3 heavy, 3 assault. Sure, you can play a light if you want but you may have a 4-5 minute wait while medium is instant.

I don't think you'd need that if the weight limits were by lance. Especially if different lance types had different weight limits.

Also - especially since the medium agility buff - mediums built for close range are the anti-light mech. With my 9 small pulse laser hunchie - I shred them. (admittedly - I built it for just that - it sucks against heavier mechs due to heat issues) The only time I had issues with a 'light' (actually a cicada) was when he was smart enough stay out of range and rake me with his mediums. Eventually he had to turn back due to the edge of the map, and I finished him.

[Hellcat420]

Spiff, on 09 October 2013 - 10:14 AM, said:

IMO one of the biggest drawbacks of the game is that fact that everyone tends to run really large or really small mechs. The lack of any meaningful role warfare means that there is really no incentive for players to run medium mechs.

Instead you end up with players picking their mech based on play style. Those who prefer firepower and armor pick a larger mech while those that prefer to use speed as armor pick a smaller one. Medium mechs tend to be targets for both.

Meanwhile, we have the ongoing complaints about the c-bill nerf and the lack of meaningful rewards for matches.

One quick fix to both problems would be to scale rewards based on the type of mech you pick. If you want to encourage folks to run more mediums, then buff the c-bill and experience reward for mediums by 50%.

This gives players a good way to make c-bills quickly, encourages them to pilot something other than victors and spiders, and doesn't require all the complex changes that role warfare would involve.

You could even tie the reward to the frequency with which the mech is used. So if commandos aren't used all that much, they get an automatic buff to rewards. If their usage increases, the buff decreases and shifts to some other chassis that isn't used all that often.

if you want more people to pilot medium mechs, you need to get more people to play the game who like medium mechs.

[Charons Little Helper]

FupDup, on 11 October 2013 - 01:51 PM, said:

It's also plausible based on the Twitter screenshots from Russ:

We can't tell for sure due to the Shawk not touching the hangar, but my own experiment with a Kintaro revealed that the Kint is just slightly taller than the hangar. The Shawk doesn't seem very far off, but we don't have any exact results yet and probably won't until it's too late.

At least the Shadowhawk is skinny - so its height isn't as stupid.

[PropagandaWar]

Artgathan, on 09 October 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

There are several problems with Mediums:

• They're (mostly) too big
  
• Engine weights mean that mediums can either move faster than a typical heavy and carry the firepower of a light, or carry more firepower but be a slow (and large) target. Either way, they're outshined by heavies on one end or lights on the other.
  
• The mobility bonuses (while helpful) didn't go far enough. Mediums would have benefited more from Accel/Deceleration and turning speed buffs

The problem with this sort of model is that it doesn't fix imbalances. It just means that people will break out the mediums when they need to grind cash to purchase their next assault.

I play mainly play mediums and vaporize most Assaults (they really are not the sweet spot mech/Heavies should get that honor). My avg fire power is 40, my avg speed is 90 (Non XL but speed tweek required) and my avg Heatsink rating is 1.4. It generally means I get to run faster, be more manuverable and fire a hell of a lot more than an assault mech, or pound and chase away any light mech, both which have a tendancy to shut down. Why people don't understand that I dunno. Yeah for some reason put xls in these mechs to go 110 kph but I rarely see the need to do that.

[Hythos]

Dirkdaring, on 11 October 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

Which is why you need to only be able to have a certain # of a class a mech per match. 3 lights, 3 medium, 3 heavy, 3 assault. Sure, you can play a light if you want but you may have a 4-5 minute wait while medium is instant.

Having 3 heavies and 3 assaults isn't typical for all Houses / Mercenaries; Though forcing class-requirements / restrictions is less dynamic than allowing open class-types, limited by tonnage (AND BATTLEVALUE!)

[Artgathan]

PropagandaWar, on 11 October 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

I play mainly play mediums and vaporize most Assaults (they really are not the sweet spot mech/Heavies should get that honor). My avg fire power is 40, my avg speed is 90 (Non XL but speed tweek required) and my avg Heatsink rating is 1.4. It generally means I get to run faster, be more manuverable and fire a hell of a lot more than an assault mech, or pound and chase away any light mech, both which have a tendancy to shut down. Why people don't understand that I dunno. Yeah for some reason put xls in these mechs to go 110 kph but I rarely see the need to do that.

I can do well in my Centurion as well (going 1v1 against assaults) so long as the Assault pilot is not particularly competent. If they let me get behind them (and can't figure out how to get me off their back) they're toast. However any Assault pilot with a brain and good eyes will vaporize me.

However, individual anecdotes do not a convincing case make. The only reason I break out my Centurion (which is my favorite mech) in "organized" play is because my unit sometimes drops with tonnage limits. Even then though I prefer to take a Jenner or Victor when possible.

[Dirkdaring]

Vassago Rain, on 11 October 2013 - 01:38 PM, said:

I'm not gonna play the game if I'm forced to run robots I don't own, don't like, and are outright worse than the other choices. This was the primary reason run hot or die never caught on outside the special interest groups.

No one is saying you have to run something you don't like. If they put in weight limits or limit per mech class you will have a longer wait with an assault mech, no way around it.