228 replies to this topic

[DocBach]

Joseph Mallan, on 22 October 2013 - 05:45 AM, said:

The way to fix High Alpha convergence... DON'T BOAT. I have been saying it for months, I have 60-70 point Alphas an since it is using Mixed bagged weapons nobody has complained.

Why does PGI need to turn the car around for us to do what we need to do?

That's not the type of alpha strike he's talking about, the OP is referring to high levels of burst damage applied instantly to a single location like massed heavy autocannons with PPCs. An alpha strike of lasers or missiles doesn't do the same kind of damage, to the same location, despite what the mechlab says your damage is.

[Joseph Mallan]

Understood Doc. But then they are not complaining about the level of Alpha. They are complaining about the convergence of it. Folks need to complain about the right problem. Its the pin point of the Alpha not the strength.

[42and19]

I hate having 5 pages of qq to wade through. Needless to say I stopped at 3

OK, here we go.

For those talking about TT and how TT didn't have meta....yea...it does. I've been playing mekwars (an online TT simulator) for the last few months and there are mechs that are deemed bad and those good. There are lance configs that are bad and those that are good. Therefore there is a meta. Anything that the majority of the players would choose over another thing due to game mechanics is a meta. Now, that being said the meta in TT does lean towards a more balanced configuration of mechs. However, things like the hunchback or anything else that stacks ppcs and ac/20s or 10s tends to be favored because of the mechanics of the game. (If a mech takes 20 damage in a round they need to roll to see if they fall over.)

Yes, alpha strikes were rare in TT and most of the time alpha striking tended to get you killed because of heat issues and such. However, the mechwarrior games have two BIG things that TT didn't. In TT there wasn't much mech customization. The rules were there but they were poorly balanced, easily exploited and thus rarely used by serious players. What this meant was that most of the mech load-outs were balanced rather than alpha focused. However, if you were to go with the customization rules you could, very easily, create a mech that is designed for high alpha strikes.

Secondly, even with a high alpha there was a decent chance you would miss with some of not all of your weapons. Hitting was determined by dice roll. It was a random chance. Granted there are a lot of things you can do to increase your chance to hit but you still have a chance of missing and even if you hit the chance of it hitting the component you wanted was even less. All weapons were, in a way, spread weapons. The chances of landing multiple hits on the CT in an alpha strike is almost non-existant. In MWO missing is based ENTIRELY on the pilots skill to keep things under his crosshairs. In my hunchback I miss maybe 3 shots out of my 21 I have for my AC/20 and most those shots go were I want them to. This ratio would NEVER happen in TT.

These two factors contribute highly to the alpha meta.

The only way to fix them that I can see is to add a "spread" to all weapons, sort of how fps games with a skill system work for low levels; and they would need to remove customization.

If they did the last, I would leave.

[AC]

Joseph Mallan, on 22 October 2013 - 05:59 AM, said:

Understood Doc. But then they are not complaining about the level of Alpha. They are complaining about the convergence of it. Folks need to complain about the right problem. Its the pin point of the Alpha not the strength.

It's both. We are never going to get cone of fire. No MW game ever had cone of fire and MW should never have cone of fire. I understand your viewpoint and why you feel it is a good solution, but that mechanic comes from FPS like Battlefield or CoD. I want to play MW, not another FPS like those games.

Past MW games limited the high alpha by limiting the mech slots. I feel this is the best solution to the issue.

[Joseph Mallan]

AC, on 22 October 2013 - 06:06 AM, said:

It's both. We are never going to get cone of fire. No MW game ever had cone of fire and MW should never have cone of fire. I understand your viewpoint and why you feel it is a good solution, but that mechanic comes from FPS like Battlefield or CoD. I want to play MW, not another FPS like those games.

Past MW games limited the high alpha by limiting the mech slots. I feel this is the best solution to the issue.

MW2 And IIRC 3 allowed me to build my Stone Rhino (3 x Gauss, 2x ERPPC) which will not be possible here sadly. While powerful as Hel, was not OP on TT. Also a CoF is fairly natural in weapons fire. Unless a round is guided, they do not hit the exact location every time. Specially while both target and shooter are moving. A Gamer's idea of shooting skill, is a lie.

Lasers I can see hitting with some Convergence but AC rounds and possibly PPCs... Nope.

[Lightfoot]

@OP,

Well LRMs and SSRMs are weak weapons because players whine about good working missiles much more than accurate aimed weapons (you called it pinpoint damage). Try some other weapons. And the Medium Laser is the pinpoint DPS king ton for ton.

Players whined for more Heat for ERPPCs so your 2xERPPC SHD must have 18 DHS or you are forced to hit and fade long periods while the mech cools off. Mechlab is full of trade-offs so balance is not so simple as looking at DPS and kills. For instance you could trade damage for speed and toughness or an ST Engine and come out with a roughly equal mech on the field of play.

I am old school MechWarrior and the fact that you group various weapons into logical groups is the normal way to set up your mech for normal operations. If you look on the HUD you will see you are given 6 weapon firing groups just for this reason.

People are coming to MechWarrior Online from games where they only get one gun and maybe one grenade and they somehow feel group-fire is a cheat, but it's not. Group-fire is the natural way to simulate a giant robot tank, bristling with lasers, missiles, and ballistics.

MWO forces the issue a bit with 2x Recharge on weapons over there Battletech normal recharge rates which forces players to make even larger groups to make sure every weapon fires at the optimal rates. If recharge times were normal players would have short recharge in one group and the big guns (6-8 second recharge) in another group.

They would also guard the CT easily by turning a good armored side to opponents unless firing. Something that is barely useful in MWO's 2xRecharge game. You can, but not as effectively, hence all the calls to somehow block accurate fire groups (pinpoint-alpha, but it's just normal group-fire) to protect the CT in a skill-free way.

The Mechs have two aim-points now and the different weapons don't actually hit the same spot. Ballistics drop, missiles splash, energy goes straight to target. So you need to ask for normal Battletech recharge rates and then protect the mech's vital parts with armored sections while waiting for your weapons to recharge to get anything better in terms of spreading damage.

[Bounty Dogg]

Noth, on 19 October 2013 - 07:11 PM, said:

Actually no, your desired changes would not have that effect. The only way that the competitive scene would use varied builds is if the mechs builds could not be changed from stock. Changes to the current system outside of that would simply change which weapons they boat. They will always, always lean towards as much pinpoint damage as possible and quickly as possible. It is simply the nature of competitive play.

And THAT, RIGHT THERE, is why we have the issues that we do. Its not pinpoint convergence vs. multi-aim reticles. Its not convergence vs. RNG aiming. Its the fact that we, as players, can CHANGE OUR LOADOUT with no consequences at all. The real reason why most 'mechs in TT and Lore (two separate things, to me at least) just didn't carry the most hardcore weapons all the time: They were cost and time prohibitive. Sure, you could change your weapons on your 'mech, but it would takes weeks of work to rework and rewire, taking your 'mech off the field for that period of time, denying you its use.

We don't have that problem in this game. We want PPCs? We yank something energy related off the 'mech and put in the PPC. We don't have to wait for the 'mech. We aren't forced to use another 'mech while it's being serviced/repaired. There's no consequences for stacking your favorite weapon on a 'mech over and over again, so we do it til we get the results we want.

That is the problem. Not Convergence. Not even boating of weapons. But the lack of PENALTIES for doing so. I hate to say it.....but I love Ghost Heat. Its one of the first real attempts to address this by PGI that kinda works. Does it work well? not really. Any skilled pilot can circumvent it if theyre careful and patient. However, they now have to actively BE careful and patient, slowing down the game. THAT is the effect we want. THAT is what helps new players survive a bit longer (a bit, mind you, not a lot.). Changing the meta (I'm sorry, but going from a High Alpha Meta to a DPS Meta is just retreading a history we've gone through before) is treating the symptoms, not the disease. Thing is, Convergence is not the Disease.

The actual Freedom of being able to switch weapons with no penalties is actually the Disease.
....Messed up, ain't it?

[Khobai]

Quote

Understood Doc. But then they are not complaining about the level of Alpha. They are complaining about the convergence of it. Folks need to complain about the right problem. Its the pin point of the Alpha not the strength.

Its not really pinpoint alpha by itself thats the problem now (due to ghost heat imposing artificial limits on most pinpoint weapons). The problem now is the combination of pinpoint alpha + long range and the perfect synergy of PPCs/AC5s.

AC40 is generally considered fine because of its 270m limitation. What makes dual PPC, dual AC5 overpowered is that its doing 30 damage at twice the range of the AC40. And even when the mech is overheating from the PPCs its still putting out a constant barrage of AC5 shots.

Essentially what it comes down to is that a weapon can do pinpoint damage or a weapon can have long-range. But when a weapon has both pinpoint damage AND long-range it causes a fundamental breakdown in weapon balance because you get the best two weapon properties rolled into one weapon.

Edited by Khobai, 22 October 2013 - 08:31 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

So now its PPCs and AC5!!!!

30 damage? Really?

Really?

I have been throwing and receiving 75 damage on TT for over a decade! That is 5 15 point hits on half as much armor! So the equivalent of 5 30 point shots turn after turn. But a single 30 point hit is to much in MW:O?

I am sorry Kho but the player base here is just... wow!

[Artgathan]

What if we introduced a two-step firing system to help 'deal' with convergence?

Essentially it would work like this:

You have two crosshairs: Point and Circle.

When you pull the trigger, two things happen:
1. Is point over an enemy mech? If yes, you hit the mech. If no, you miss. Simple.
2. What is Circle covering? Here is where a bit of chance comes in. Essentially, the more that a component fills circle, the more likely that component is to be hit. For instance: if I put Circle over an enemy mech, such that half of the Circle covers the CT and half covers the LT, I have a 50/50 chance to hit either section with whatever I fire. If 75% of the Circle covers the CT, I have a 75% chance to hit the CT and a 25% chance to hit the LT.

Note: If the Circle contains empty space there is NO CHANCE TO MISS. The empty space is discounted from the firing equation and the components in the circle are re-weighted accordingly.

This system gives us some wiggle-room for Pinpoint/Nonpinpoint Accuracy by manipulating the size of the Circle. The bigger the Circle gets, the more shots will be randomly distributed over an enemy battlemech. The smaller the Circle, the more Pinpoint the shots get. Note also that the circle would primarily affect how Torso sections interact, since limbs would be easier to isolate within the Circle (for instance, regardless of the size of the Circle it's always going to be easier to get just one leg inside the circle than just one torso section).

Using this, we can add our own "to-hit" penalties. Note that the Point never changes.

For example, if you're moving fast, the circle gets bigger. You can put the Point over an enemy mech and score a guaranteed hit - it might just not go where you want it to.

We can also just forgo "to-hit" penalties and have a fixed circle size as well.

So again, two step targeting:
1.Pinpoint Aim: Did I hit a target?
2. Circle Aim: What did I hit on that target?

[MandoZ]

I'd like to see longer weapon recharge times. A bit of slowing down would do the game good as it would make aiming and positioning your shots more important. Tweak armor values to achieve desired time to kill. Especially the light mech gameplay is just horrible at the moment. Hit and run is how they should play and not circle 170 km/h around an assault and constantly spray stuff on it.

Another possible change would be removing the armor value restrictions. Getting cored too fast? Put 200 armor in the front. Losing your arms all the time? Put a hundred in each. The values balance themselves around the current meta. If missiles and cone of fire/crosshair sway for lasers and AC's become the new meta, armor will be more spread around. Instead of following TT mechanics more or less, they should focus on trying to achieve a correct feeling and pacing in the game by using other novel mechanics or tweaks.

[Fut]

Noth, on 19 October 2013 - 05:32 PM, said:

You mean TT? Lore and stories varied widely in how effective mechs and weapons are. TT does not translate well at all to real time. The heat system is ripped almost directly from TT (Except we shut down the instant we reach our cap and yes TT has a variable cap before even reaching the heat penalties).

There can be no meta that matches lore or the TT simply from the fact that TT is a turn based game and lore varies too much. As long as there are competitive teams seeking the best builds, there will always bee a dominant meta. In low tierd games you actually see something closer to the lore (mixed and varied builds, super specialized builds are not super common place like in the top tier).

Whoa whoa whoa!
It's my opinion that MWO is having balancing issues because it doesn't follow the TT Heat Tables! And I know that there are many people on the forums that feel the same way.

How can you say that the MWO Heat is even close to TT? In TT your Mech would suffer penalties to both movement and accuracy as your heat increased, there was a potential for ammo explosions due to heat, and you'd risk shut down - all before your heat even reached 50%!



What's MWO have that resembles this at all? You Mech produces heat, and it shuts down if you get too hot (100%).
Many problems with balancing Mechs and Weapons would be cured if PGI would implement a TRUE Heat Scale.

Also, all the "Avoid on" numbers open the game up for a better Pilot Skill tree, putting points into something like "Heat Management" would make you better at avoiding the heat penalties, for example.

[Parazaine]

Who cares what the 'meta' is or what tournament teams are running? Tournaments, in my humble opinion, mean nothing in the long-run other than which team is better at employing the current meta....can't really see the point at the moment.

Personally, i prefer heat-balanced builds over high-alpha ones....both have their place and their niches but a balanced one seems to fit my play style better whilst some people will turn blue in the face shouting that high alpha is the only way to go.

It's a game, meant to be fun and not meant to be analysed to death to get the highest dps or alpha....leave that to the call of duty crowd (no particular offence intended)

Edited by Parazaine, 22 October 2013 - 09:18 AM.

[Krumenool]

Dudeman3k, on 19 October 2013 - 06:05 PM, said:

If you read it one more time, im sure you'll see, Im asking for MORE skill to aim. as in, Multiple cross-hairs, I DO want to shoot where I am aiming, I just want to have to work a bit harder than I do now

This seems to be the most straightforward solution, and the reason why it isn't implemented could be:
The most popular shooters allow you to one-shot your enemy (in the head).

Older games (most often non-shooters) are often fun, because they provide varied gameplay. You have to manage multiple systems, care about multiple goals, etc.
MWO is not much more than DOOM in terms of complexity, no matter how much more convoluted the heatsystem gets. But this is a just how the shooter genre has worked.

The entire issue looks to me like the result of the first-glance-appeal, 3D first person shooters have to many.

Anyway, if you play with people who also "handicap" themselves with "fun-builds", then it is better.

Edited by Krumenool, 22 October 2013 - 10:28 AM.

[Dymlos2003]

I'm wondering if any of these complainers of high alpha have played ANY of the other mechwarrior games before.... I mean really? ITS part of Mechwarrior, sorry to say.

[Joseph Mallan]

Its sad that a single 30 point Alpha is considered a High Alpha Now! I mean 60 I could kinda understand. But 30? How wimpy are we going to make this game? This is the equivalent damage of a single Gauss on TT!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 22 October 2013 - 11:05 AM.

[Vanguard836]

Joseph Mallan, on 22 October 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

Its sad that a single 30 point Alpha is considered a High Alpha Now! I mean 60 I could kinda understand. But 30? How wimpy are we going to make this game? This is the equivalent damage of a single Gauss on TT!

ROF plays a hand in that. Not 100% of it but still a part.

TT Gauss damage is 15 no ?
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Gauss_Rifle

Edited by Vanguard836, 22 October 2013 - 11:33 AM.

[Artgathan]

Vanguard836, on 22 October 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

ROF plays a hand in that. Not 100% of it but still a part.

TT Gauss damage is 15 no ?
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Gauss_Rifle

I believe his point was that if we equate the doubled armor w/ a 30-point strike in MWO it becomes roughly equivalent to a single Gauss hit against TT armor (15 points vs. normal armor).

[Blacksoul1987]

Lightfoot, on 22 October 2013 - 08:11 AM, said:

@OP,

Well LRMs and SSRMs are weak weapons because players whine about good working missiles much more than accurate aimed weapons (you called it pinpoint damage). Try some other weapons. And the Medium Laser is the pinpoint DPS king ton for ton.

Players whined for more Heat for ERPPCs so your 2xERPPC SHD must have 18 DHS or you are forced to hit and fade long periods while the mech cools off. Mechlab is full of trade-offs so balance is not so simple as looking at DPS and kills. For instance you could trade damage for speed and toughness or an ST Engine and come out with a roughly equal mech on the field of play.

I am old school MechWarrior and the fact that you group various weapons into logical groups is the normal way to set up your mech for normal operations. If you look on the HUD you will see you are given 6 weapon firing groups just for this reason.

People are coming to MechWarrior Online from games where they only get one gun and maybe one grenade and they somehow feel group-fire is a cheat, but it's not. Group-fire is the natural way to simulate a giant robot tank, bristling with lasers, missiles, and ballistics.

MWO forces the issue a bit with 2x Recharge on weapons over there Battletech normal recharge rates which forces players to make even larger groups to make sure every weapon fires at the optimal rates. If recharge times were normal players would have short recharge in one group and the big guns (6-8 second recharge) in another group.

They would also guard the CT easily by turning a good armored side to opponents unless firing. Something that is barely useful in MWO's 2xRecharge game. You can, but not as effectively, hence all the calls to somehow block accurate fire groups (pinpoint-alpha, but it's just normal group-fire) to protect the CT in a skill-free way.

The Mechs have two aim-points now and the different weapons don't actually hit the same spot. Ballistics drop, missiles splash, energy goes straight to target. So you need to ask for normal Battletech recharge rates and then protect the mech's vital parts with armored sections while waiting for your weapons to recharge to get anything better in terms of spreading damage.

I'm confused here.....you say normal battletech recharge rates of 6-8 seconds? those are MechWarrior 4 recharge rates ALL weapons in battletech had a 10 second recharge rate. In MWO the best way to group your weapons is base of travel velocity.

[Praehotec8]

It's funny that so many people are upset over pinpoint alpha strikes, yet no one seems to be willing to play without using them. There are definitely ways to play without instant, long-range, pinpoint alpha strikes. Some examples:

1.) Mix your weapon loadouts
2.) Fire discreet weapon groups at different intervals.
3.) Use a joystick (if you can make snap-to-target aimed, longe-range, strikes with high precision consistently with a joystick, you deserve to get the damage/kill).

If the community did those things, things would be much more balanced. However, players in the community refuse to do so because it isn't efficient. We all like to win, and some players will ALWAYS find the most efficient mechanics and exploit them (Read: elite gamers). So in effect, what we are asking, is for the developer to artificially enforce a handicap so we can't abuse the game mechanics as well. I put this here just to hopefully get some of you all to think a bit...

Well, my artificial balancing mechanism is this: make the mouse's ability to quickly aim with high precision more difficult. Make it just as hard to aim with the mouse as with a joystick, and see how the game changes. It would make a difference, but skilled players would still be able to aim to the best of their ability.