427 replies to this topic

[oldradagast]

Roland, on 10 November 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

A while ago, I wrote up a thread about how to solve this issue, and the answer is to base value upon a dynamically calculated battle value based upon the relative usage stats from the prior time period (say, the last two weeks).

Thus, every two weeks, the usage of mechs and equipment is used to derive a value for everything in the game. Then, each team is given a total value to work with. For pugs, each individual group would get some value.

The beauty of this type of system is that it is effectively guaranteed to automatically adjust to the real value of weapons and mechs. It will automatically incorporate various aspects of balance, like mech geometry, which are inherently difficult to value.

It will also result in a constantly changing meta game, as teams are forced to work within a constantly changing value system. It will also dramatically reduce the workload of the pgi guys, as the system will largely self organize.

I'm tempted to write up a more detailed breakdown of how the system would work, to the extent of actually writing out the algorithm for value calculation, but I kind of fear it would fall on deaf ears.

I love this idea.

It fits the general concept of Battletech, and it works in a way to add a sort of economy to the game (some mechs and items are more expensive while others are cheaper in battle value points) without actually messing up the costs of purchases or making it so players can't get the mechs or items they want. It would also reward creative builds, underdog mechs, and so on while self-balancing against the "flavor of the month" that everyone runs.

Edited by oldradagast, 10 November 2013 - 11:35 AM.

[S13gtastic]

The first mech I bought was a Centurian and man is that sucker big for a medium, what I feel like the biggest issue is just the scaling on mediums seems off, part of it is how the hierarchy is in past Mechwarrior games has put it in my mind that

Lights gotta go fast, but limited ammount of weapons,
Mediums: Not as fast as a light but able to bring more firepower to bare, retain some of the agileness of a light, the grunts of the battle field
Heavy: Slower and less agile but able to fiddle with more tonage for weapons and gagets.
Assults: Slow, slow slow, but ment to push and/or hold the line, massive deadly firepower.

[Diego Angelus]

Roland, on 09 October 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

Make medium mechs not suck so bad.

Mediums should be smaller than heavy mechs. The biggest medium should be smaller than the smallest heavy. Mech tonnage should translate DIRECTLY into mech volume.

Yeah, I understand that this may not be how it would be in the real world. I DO NOT GIVE A ****.

Gameplay trumps realism. You need to have mech volume and tonnage directly correlated, or else stuff doesn't work right.

I agree I only pilot mediums, lets take hunch for example that shoulder looks like i can hold something very big but it holds only AC20 i mean look how AC20 looks on BJ its tiny.

[Wolfways]

While i agree that certain mechs need a size change has anyone considered the following?

How PGI see's class roles:
Assault kills heavy kills medium kills light kills assault, etc.

So mediums are supposed to be the light hunters, yet everyone knows that the best light-killer weapons are the big, heavy high damage weapons (PPC, AC20, gauss, etc. and SSRM's to an extent), but if a medium hopes to kill lights he needs a big engine because lights always slap in the biggest engine they can, and that doesn't leave much weight for a medium to fit big weapons.

There are two ways to fix this (neither of which are going to happen for obvious reasons).

1) Slow all mechs down (movement and torso twist) making it easier to kill lights. (insert screams of light pilots here)

2) Make all weapons equally viable for killing lights (Don't see how this can happen unless all "non-instant damage" weapons (like lasers) are changed to do full damage to the first component they hit (i.e. 4xML's become like an AC20 thanks to convergence).

As long as PGI wants mediums to be light-killers there will probably be few players wanting to play them because players don't want the job (like the lights who refuse to cap in Conquest) and/or bigger mechs (with bigger damage weapons) and light mechs (with smaller weapons but equal in speed) will always be the better light-killers.

Imo.

[Khobai]

Quote

How PGI see's class roles:
Assault kills heavy kills medium kills light kills assault, etc.

How class roles actually are:
highlander kills everything.

[Diego Angelus]

Khobai, on 10 November 2013 - 01:45 PM, said:

How class roles actually are:
highlander kills everything.

I don't know how to fix it but I hope things get changed soon. Maybe if heat/lasers gets fixed we would see medium more effective.

[Steel Claws]

I still see plenty of medium mechs and run them myself - the reason being they are far more fun to drive than a heavy or assault.

[ArchSight]

The long range wide flanker/Harasser is what I've been playing my Medium Mech's as for awhile now and I'm getting bored of just doing this advantage most of the time. I use a higher speed than most heavies around 90-100kph+ and longer range weapons too whittle down heavies and Assaults tell their my size before killing them. I fend of lights with ranged and short range weapons that can get up to a standard 30+ pin point damage under 3 seconds when ever they try to approach to brawl with me. I don't chase lights. I let them come into my weapons. I look for good positions that give me supporting fire from my team but also allow me to hit the other team where my team can't. I believe doing this is too complicated for all players and teams; sense, there are teams that seem to not need to use medium mechs.

I think Medium Mechs would benefit if it's easier to make advantageous or bad builds work with some kind of secondary mechanic influencing the situation like Consumables, modules, and Electronics on the mech or that could assist it.

I'm looking to change it up by making some brawler medium mechs but I know there's too many disadvantages for medium mechs in brawling to be good in random teammate play. Like the buggy hit detection of SRM's and teammates unwilling to get close enough to assist. I'm thinking artillery and air strikes might help with a close range ambushing type of medium mech for blowing up mechs quickly from behind. Maybe coolant flush too fire faster during the exchange of fire when the situation happens. Maybe weapons that reach farther than seismic sensor can detect.

I'm also looking into a way for mediums to take advantage in LRMs with UAV, NARC, TAG, JJ's, and (ER)PPC's but finding it difficult with the limited tonnage, and variations of height for each hard point.

Edited by ArchSight, 10 November 2013 - 03:53 PM.

[Diego Angelus]

ArchSight, on 10 November 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

The long range wide flanker is what I've been playing my Medium Mech's as for awhile now and I'm getting bored of just doing this advantage most of the time. I use a higher speed than most heavies around 90-100kph+ and longer range weapons too whittle down heavies and Assaults tell their my size before killing them. I fend of lights with ranged and short range weapons that can get up to a standard 30+ pin point damage under 3 seconds when ever they try to approach to brawl with me. I don't chase lights. I let them come into my weapons. I look for good positions that give me supporting fire from my team but also allow me to hit the other team where my team can't. I believe doing this is too complicated for all players and teams; sense, there are teams that seem to not need to use medium mechs.

I think Medium Mechs would benefit if it's easier to make advantageous or bad builds work with some kind of secondary mechanic influencing the situation like Consumables, modules, and Electronics on the mech or that could assist it.

I'm looking to change it up by making some brawler medium mechs but I know there's too many disadvantages for medium mechs in brawling to be good in random teammate play. Like the buggy hit detection of SRM's. I'm thinking artillery and air strikes might help with a close range ambushing type of medium mech for blowing up mechs quickly from behind. Maybe coolant flush too fire faster during the exchange of fire when the situation happens. Maybe weapons that reach farther than seismic sensor can detect.

I'm also looking into a way for mediums to take advantage in LRMs with UAV, NARC, TAG, JJ's, and (ER)PPC's but finding it difficult with the limited tonnage, and variations of height for each hard point.

TRB is good min LRM boat with tag I saw my friend do very well in it. when I brawl in my hunch 4SP or 4G i tend to get move past enemy mech so they turn for me because if they don't I will hit from behind and in that time my team is shooting at them. Many times I lose both arms in that process but usually win those fights with low casualties.

[Asbjorn Ironside]

I have four variants of the hunchback, each for a different role, and two centurions. I love my medium mechs and I play mostly with them all the time. I also have a Battlemaster that I use sometimes, a Locust that I never use, and the two other phoenix mechs that I have yet to play with. IMO The hunchback is one of the best mechs there is and its my favourite, after that its the centurion which is brilliant.
I think maybe there is a lack of medium mechs simply due to them being slightly more difficult to pilot. I mean with heavy and assualt you have more armor and weapons and the speed of some heavy mechs can be equal to and even better than my hunchback and well lights, though not for me, are very fast and, when piloted well, bloody brilliant.

On a personal note I do believe that Heavy and assualt mechs should be made bigger size-wise and medium mechs should be left the way they are, In the Novels mechs like the atlas are made to sound absolutely awesome and terrifying and I think the assault mechs (all of them) should be a little taller, as well as the heavy mechs too.

[Jonathan Paine]

Mediums work well for killing lights. If you cant kill a light when you have 3-4-5 streaks+bap+top speed of 100+, you suck. We need class and tonnage limits. End of story.

[Steel Claws]

I think people are forgetting that the Shadowhawk is a medium as well (even if it is built like a Heavy) and while it is likely they are being leveled up right now, plenty of p[eople are running them as well.

[Rovertoo]

I say that Mediums shouldn't have a monetary bonus, to me it almost enhances how they seem inferior. I would suggest two things: Create better hitboxes, similar to the Spider or Centurion, so they can really take a beating, and rescale the larger mediums. I played a lot of MW4, and the mediums were very viable, and I remember the 55 ton mechs being roughly as large as 50 ton mechs in this game.

[Harmatia]

The reality of war logistics do not allow for any given army to comprise their force of the biggest and most powerful equipment at their disposal. This is true for a variety of reasons, be it financial, resource, time, transportation, environmental damage or simple tactics. Surely it costs more to build, arm, repair and transport an Atlas than it would a Locust. So why shouldn't team composition in MWO reflect this?

Possible solutions for actual in-game mechanics:

• Tonnage limits.
  
• Weight class limits. For example, each team would only be given enough resources to field 2 assault, 3 heavy, 5 medium and 2 light. Maybe then in some phase of "Community Warfare" allow for territorial control to increase faction/merc resources.
  
• Operating costs for mechs that scale based on tonnage. So a Locust would be the cheapest to run and an Atlas the most expensive. This would be deducted at the end of each round.
  
• Proper mech scaling.

Currently there is little incentive to pilot a medium mech. I can find a suitable replacement for any one of mine in the light or heavy class. That said, I continued to stubbornly use my Hunchbacks because I love them.

Additionally, players need to select their mechs after a team has been matched by the system and not before.

[Vassago Rain]

Harmatia, on 10 November 2013 - 08:25 PM, said:

The reality of war logistics do not allow for any given army to comprise their force of the biggest and most powerful equipment at their disposal. This is true for a variety of reasons, be it financial, resource, time, transportation, environmental damage or simple tactics. Surely it costs more to build, arm, repair and transport an Atlas than it would a Locust. So why shouldn't team composition in MWO reflect this? Possible solutions for actual in-game mechanics:

• Tonnage limits.
• Weight class limits. For example, each team would only be given enough resources to field 2 assault, 3 heavy, 5 medium and 2 light. Maybe then in some phase of "Community Warfare" allow for territorial control to increase faction/merc resources.
• Operating costs for mechs that scale based on tonnage. So a Locust would be the cheapest to run and an Atlas the most expensive. This would be deducted at the end of each round.
• Proper mech scaling.

Currently there is little incentive to pilot a medium mech. I can find a suitable replacement for any one of mine in the light or heavy class. That said, I continued to stubbornly use my Hunchbacks because I love them. Additionally, players need to select their mechs after a team has been matched by the system and not before.

The reality of war is that if you deploy a dozen high-tech tanks worth a gorillion dollars, old surplus hardware simply folds under you guaranteed, and you win.

[Sephlock]

Vassago Rain, on 10 November 2013 - 11:06 PM, said:

The reality of war is that if you deploy a dozen high-tech tanks worth a gorillion dollars, old surplus hardware simply folds under you guaranteed, and you win.

Then begins the insurgency!

Have fun hunting down that 1 Spider on the far side of the map for 10 minutes straight!

[Artgathan]

All of these "we need to fix the weight balancing! We need tonnage limits! We need a BV system! We need a medium C-Bill bonus!" need to stop. These don't make mediums better. They really only accomplish one thing: force certain people to play the cannon fodder. That's cool with me as long as I get to be Kai Allard-Liao and the rest of you play the sacrificial lambs.

PGI needs to make mediums better. Make them smaller and more mobile - I should be able to outmaneuver a heavy mech going the same speed as me while I'm piloting a medium (physics what is it). No "passive" bonuses.

Here's the problems with the suggestions mentioned above:

• C-Bill Bonus: Mediums still suck. People will only play mediums when they need cash.
  
• Tonnage Limits: Mediums still suck. People will min/max drop loadouts to avoid having to play mediums / mediums will still get dominated by the heavy / assault mechs they do run into.
  
• BV Matching: Medium mechs become viable, but only because they only fight other medium mechs due to their trash BV.

[Dago Red]

Artgathan, on 11 November 2013 - 06:15 AM, said:

These don't make mediums better. They really only accomplish one thing: force certain people to play the cannon fodder. That's cool with me as long as I get to be Kai Allard-Liao and the rest of you play the sacrificial lambs.

But Kai drove a medium............

Edited by Dago Red, 11 November 2013 - 10:05 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

Sephlock, on 10 November 2013 - 11:14 PM, said:

Then begins the insurgency!

Have fun hunting down that 1 Spider on the far side of the map for 10 minutes straight!

Fix the netcode, and killing the spider won't be a problem.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sephlock, on 10 November 2013 - 11:14 PM, said:

Then begins the insurgency!

Have fun hunting down that 1 Spider on the far side of the map for 10 minutes straight!

That one Spider... If not matched by a similar Light, deserves to win/tie, in that scenario, due to the victory conditions of the match. If the rules are adjusted to allow the team with more assets left at end of match to win, hiding does nothing but preserve a players K/D.