47 replies to this topic

[focuspark]

Alistair Winter, on 10 October 2013 - 05:18 AM, said:

One part of the problem is that PGI hasn't been able to figure out how to balance certain classic BT tech for this game specifically. Assault mechs with multiple ballistics are a good example, but let's not forget the Clan mechs, which will probably be very different from how people remember them in other MW games.

Another part of the problem is that fans have very different expectations, making it difficult for PGI to make everyone happy. Some people want MWO to be a carbon copy of TT rules, and will justify any imbalance in the game with their battlecry "That's how things worked in TT." Other gamers never played TT or read BT novels, and want MWO to more closely resemble older MW games. A third group never knew BT before MWO, and don't care if it completely breaks commonly accepted BT lore. And a fourth group are very focused on the idea that balancing the game for competitive, elite level play is not only the key to improving the game for everyone, but a complete necessity for the long term success of MWO.

No matter what road PGI takes, they're going to step on some toes.

I personally think they will go with the secret fifth option, leaving all different groups equally ambivalent. Probably introduce the Annihilator and then reduce the AC20 ammo capacity as a balancing tool, making no sense at all and only partially solving the problem. But then, some people have accused me of being a bit jaded.

Group 3.5 here. Never played TT or MW before AND believe you must completely balance any multiplayer game. See StarCraft as a model for success here.

[Kitane]

The bullet drop is already in and it is noticeable when firing at 400m+.

I wouldn't mind seeing the muzzle velocity of AC20 massively nerfed to 350-400 m/s, leaving everything else as it is. It would still fly faster than SRMs, its devastating brawling potential wouldn't be much affected. But it would make medium range shots more skill-intensive, and fighting against AC40 mechs in fast/agile brawlers (*cough* mediums *cough*) wouldn't feel like a head-on crash with a train

350-400m/s is also more believable for what looks like a large caliber short-barreled demolition gun.

AC20 medium mechs are my favorite ride in the game, especially the Hunchback, it's not like I want to nerf it out of spite.

[mike29tw]

MustrumRidcully, on 10 October 2013 - 07:31 AM, said:

In general, the effective ranges of weapons in M:WO are inflated. The particular drop-off model for ballistics is yet another thing on top of that.

Range and speed tend to interact. If you can run out of range or into range within 10 seconds or within 5 seconds can make quite a difference (about 2 vs 1 alpha, for example). I wonder if with overall lower weapon ranges, existing speed differences would start mattering more.

Just fix the range on ACs would do IMO. This is probably why if you're in a heavy/assault, and you CAN mount an AC20, you're doing it wrong if you don't mount one. Slower mech's tend to be on the passive side of any engagement. They have less control over in which range they want to fight than the more nimble ones. Therefore the most heavy ballistic weapon which spreads fear in close range and remains a serious threat up to 500 meters becomes the must-have weapon for any heavy/assault.

General Taskeen, on 10 October 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

And about AC's in the thread. The main reason they are a concern is simply because PGI opts to put in full damage translation from TT. 1 Shell, 1 type of full damage. Instead they should have made more Dakka, like actual autocannons, that scales up in damage, and simply shoots bursts of bullets, cools down, then shoots another burst of bullets. For instance they could have made different types of manufactured AC/20's, one that shoots 8 Shells and scales up to 20 damage, shoots a little faster, and an AC/20 that shoots 4 bullets, but slower, etc.

That would fix so many problems we have right now......

[Nryrony]

mike29tw, on 10 October 2013 - 09:56 AM, said:

Just fix the range on ACs would do IMO. This is probably why if you're in a heavy/assault, and you CAN mount an AC20, you're doing it wrong if you don't mount one. Slower mech's tend to be on the passive side of any engagement. They have less control over in which range they want to fight than the more nimble ones. Therefore the most heavy ballistic weapon which spreads fear in close range and remains a serious threat up to 500 meters becomes the must-have weapon for any heavy/assault.

My Atlas does very well with its 2xUCA5 setup, no need for AC20 here.

[Vodrin Thales]

Starquestman, on 09 October 2013 - 09:38 PM, said:

We have assault mechs that boat missiles, assault mechs that boat lasers, but no assault mech can handle more than one Gauss rifle or AC 10. Most will never have more than two AC5. Mech variants are being deliberately withheld to prevent users from getting their hands on AC40 assaults. I've been saying this for a while now but all I hear is that "it's just not fair to all the little mechs". I've waited maybe a year for one - just one variant - and nothing. No Victor, no Highlander, and now it doesn't look like the Battlemaster either. I feel like, in our attempt to become fair and balanced, we've simply done away with all the good guns and restricted firepower of the one class that was supposed to have it most. Are we EVER going to get a ballistic assault?

This is intended for the devs because, as impressive and fun as this game is, I'm honestly beginning to get disappointed with it. Or is there another factor completely unrelated that I'm just not seeing?

Are you actually saying that the poor Highlanders, Atlases, and Stalkers are underpowered?

[Praehotec8]

Alistair Winter, on 10 October 2013 - 05:18 AM, said:

No matter what road PGI takes, they're going to step on some toes.

This is I think the biggest problem with the development thus far: everyone has very high expectations for the game, but no one has the SAME expectations. No matter what PGI does, someone cries about it. I'm not saying everything PGI does is perfect, but at the same time, they're trying to walk a bumpy road.

That being said, I absolutely think there should be multi-ballistic assaults in the game. Especially the King Crab!

[Joseph Mallan]

Praehotec8, on 10 October 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:

This is I think the biggest problem with the development thus far: everyone has very high expectations for the game, but no one has the SAME expectations. No matter what PGI does, someone cries about it. I'm not saying everything PGI does is perfect, but at the same time, they're trying to walk a bumpy road.

That being said, I absolutely think there should be multi-ballistic assaults in the game. Especially the King Crab!

Yes a canon Cannon carrying Assault!

[Nik Van Rhijn]

I'd even (at least occasionally) abandon my mediums for an Annie - 2 x UAC5, 2 x AC10.