180 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

Just a quick question

What's the argument going to be if they do away with pinpoint and players are still getting owned using the same tactic, but taking 6 jumps to kill as opposed to 3? Do you REALLY think taking away pinpoint is going to alter a strategy that works consistently? Oh, so I can't do pinpoint but I can still use the exact same tactic because instead of learning how to counter it players are just going to QQ on the forums about it.

Strategy isn't affected by balance. Strategy, coordination, and tactics are universal. Taking away pinpoit won't change anything. The onle way to get it "removed" is to disable the ability to shoot while jumping. Instead of constantly complaining about tactics that are being used either learn to counter, stop playing 12mans, or use the same tactics

[Mystere]

Sandpit, on 23 November 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

Just a quick question

What's the argument going to be if they do away with pinpoint and players are still getting owned using the same tactic, but taking 6 jumps to kill as opposed to 3? Do you REALLY think taking away pinpoint is going to alter a strategy that works consistently? Oh, so I can't do pinpoint but I can still use the exact same tactic because instead of learning how to counter it players are just going to QQ on the forums about it.

Strategy isn't affected by balance. Strategy, coordination, and tactics are universal. Taking away pinpoit won't change anything. The onle way to get it "removed" is to disable the ability to shoot while jumping. Instead of constantly complaining about tactics that are being used either learn to counter, stop playing 12mans, or use the same tactics

Well, I personally would go for learning to counter, simply because:

• Use Same Tactics = Monkey See, Monkey Do
  
• QQ = You deserve neither sympathy nor pity.

[Troggy]

100x this!

Basically, if SRMs don't do reliable damage when you hit with them, nobody will use them. As they are the main infighter counter to PPC/Ballistic ranged fire, you will only see one type of play.

Example, I cornered a centurion in a 4xASRM6 Battlemaster. Hit it with 3 alpha-strikes to its torso (Ping=60ms). The armour (not internals) went orange and yellow. The 4 strike killed it outright. The first and third salvos had appeared to do virtually nothing (though cursor went red). #2 had done all the armour damage.

That is the worst example (it's rare to lose two salvos in 4), but it's impossible to justify the use of a mech like that in a 12 man, in what essentally amounts to dice rolls.

I have confidence that the meta will sort itself out, if PGI can figure out what is resulting in borked SRMs.
--
Troggy

kaffeangst, on 22 November 2013 - 07:48 AM, said:

Fix SRM hit detection/Host State Rewind. That's a solution.

[WarZ]

Another fix someone brought up was:

When a mech is in the air, he has the random hit element to ALL shots, going up and coming down, jump jets on or off. Now 2/3 of those shots jump snipers make wont even hit the target mech at all. And definately shouldnt hit in the targeted spot.

Rationale is without contact to the ground, the mechs gyros / servos / etc can't counter weapon kickbacks. So the shots fly off more randomly.

This is the ONLY reason with proper rational I would ever want to see random hits implemented into the game. The WoT style always random hit shots for every shot would **** me off and drive me away from the game. However in controlled circumstances like this with the proper reasoning and effort to balance an exploit, I'm okay with it.

Why poptarting is really an exploit ?

The biggest reason poptarting is an exploit is simply they are getting almost free attacks on other players with little risk of being shot back. They are dishing out large amounts of damage, and taking LITTLE TO NONE in return. That is what makes an exploit. The weapons they carry are not nearly as big a factor as how they get to employ them. People are focusing on the weapons, but its the little risk versus HUGE reward they get from popping up, firing, then gaining full cover before enemies can fire back is what makes them so tough.

We dont worry nearly so much about the atlas that has to lumber out around a rock, take a shot then slowly trudge back behind it. Why ? Because that maneuver creates normal exposure time, and the time it takes to peek a boo out then back, gives the enemy a FAIR chance to make return shots at him. There is risk for him to expose himself to take his own shots.

A poptart has little risk. By the time they have gone up far enough to get their shot off, they are almost IMMEDIATELY back behind cover again. Minimizing or eliminating their exposure to any damage.

Thats what hurts the most.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Man, this thread is still going?

Bump

++PostCount ;

[Sandpit]

WarZ, on 23 November 2013 - 02:12 PM, said:

Another fix someone brought up was:


We dont worry nearly so much about the atlas that has to lumber out around a rock, take a shot then slowly trudge back behind it. Why ? Because that maneuver creates normal exposure time, and the time it takes to peek a boo out then back, gives the enemy a FAIR chance to make return shots at him. There is risk for him to expose himself to take his own shots.

A poptart has little risk.

It's not "broken"

You can shoot at them for the exact same amount of time that they can shoot at you, how much more "fair" do you want it? It's not like they magically appear out of the ether and disappear after they shoot. They expose themselves just as much as you're exposed to them. I have yet to see a poptart magically appear not giving me a chace to shoot at them the same way they shoot at me

Uhm, that's called being smart. You know who else has little risk? LRM boats 1000 meters at max range, raining down death on your heads with the help of a decent spotter. Oh and mechs that finds a bridge or something to hide under when that "incoming missiles" pops up on their screen. Oh, and smart pilots who utilize cover to advance so they can't be shot until they're in range. Oh, and lights that maximize their speed to make them hard to hit. Oh, and teams that stick together to pick off rambo pilots. Oh, and well I think you get the point by now.

[aniviron]

Don't worry guys PGI fixed poptarting over a year ago:

[Greyboots]

The changes did not, and were not intended, to stop poptarting. You physically can't stop pop tarting without removing Jump Jets from the game. The changes were only intended to tone it down to a "fair" level. Well, either that or the devs are clueless which I seriously doubt despite all the rumors about them.

Pop Tarting is not going to go anywhere. The reason of course is exactly what everyone is complaining about with a slightly different focus.

AC's are the "cream of the crop" having the ability to sustain fire, give pinpoint damage and the longest range. The easiest feature to remove from this unholy triumverate is sustained fire. The way to do that is poptarting or using an LRM heavy team.

Since only premades can guarantee a LRM heavy team? Poptarting is going to be very popular amongst the PuG community.

And honestly? Why should it leave?

Sandpit, on 23 November 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

You can shoot at them for the exact same amount of time that they can shoot at you, how much more "fair" do you want it? It's not like they magically appear out of the ether and disappear after they shoot. They expose themselves just as much as you're exposed to them. I have yet to see a poptart magically appear not giving me a chace to shoot at them the same way they shoot at me.

Bad tactical assessment and you aren't quite right BUT it's a little irrelevant. What poptarting takes away is the ability to fire back in a sustained manner which is the strength of the AC (low heat generation). This means that Spike/Burst damage mechs are able to level the playing field which is why ER PPCs were such a popular weapon to do it with. Higher damage at range than many AC weapons. While ACs have longer range, ER PPCs have a very long optimal range which beats every AC. The ACs are firing back at a reduced rate of damage at those extended ranges allowing pop tarts to keep pace AND have the pinpoint advantage that ACs have.

Which, again, I see no problems with.

Changes have been made, pop tarting has been controlled. If you still have a problem with Poptarts then fix it in game. Choose your loadout to combat them or accept the consequences. Play a light or fast medium mech with a TAG and get out there and tag the poptarts for your LRM counterparts. Drop a UAV on them.

There are other ways to fight them than through the forums and tactical games are supposed to offer advantages for tactical gameplay. If all you do is walk forward firing auto cannons? There are both tactical advantages and drawbacks in that approach. You have to accept the drawbacks for the advantages, that's how it works.

The most DPS you can muster isn't supposed to be a guaranteed game winner.

[WarZ]

Sandpit, on 23 November 2013 - 02:37 PM, said:

It's not "broken"

You can shoot at them for the exact same amount of time that they can shoot at you, how much more "fair" do you want it? It's not like they magically appear out of the ether and disappear after they shoot. They expose themselves just as much as you're exposed to them. I have yet to see a poptart magically appear not giving me a chace to shoot at them the same way they shoot at me

Uhm, that's called being smart. You know who else has little risk? LRM boats 1000 meters at max range, raining down death on your heads with the help of a decent spotter. Oh and mechs that finds a bridge or something to hide under when that "incoming missiles" pops up on their screen. Oh, and smart pilots who utilize cover to advance so they can't be shot until they're in range. Oh, and lights that maximize their speed to make them hard to hit. Oh, and teams that stick together to pick off rambo pilots. Oh, and well I think you get the point by now.

Wrong. It takes less time for a jump jet mech to get airborne for a shot than it takes for the same mech to walk out of cover to fire its weapons. Then on top of that 'less time to get out to shoot', the mech instantly drops back into full cover. That means no time needed to slowly back pedal into cover. Overall the mech thats poptarting only needs to be exposed to enemy fire for about 1/3 'ish of the time that the same mech would be exposed if it were to walk out cover then back to cover (peek a boo).

But the poptarting mech gets to do its FULL alpha of damage, even though its exposed to enemy fire for a fraction of the amount of time a non poptarting mech would be.

Its called risk vs. reward.

They are getting the full reward for little to no risk. Thats a problem. Its also called broken as you say.

Jump jet capable mechs that use the tactic gain an unfair advantage. Now if you want to say that its a valid tactic - then the only solution is to give ALL MECHS AND VARIANTS jump jet capability. So at least everyone has the opportunity to exploit the tactic. Not allowing all mechs poptarting capability means that the chasis with it have an unfair advantage.

At least with randomizing / skewing the shots of the mechs when in the air / poptarting at all times, they are reducing the reward to reflect the lower risk of the tactic.

Bottom line its a low risk tactic. But its giving full rewards.

One way or the other, the situation needs to be addressed. That much is obvious. If its not obvious to you, maybe you should review your own tactics and consider how much you rely on poptarting. Sure its "smart" as you say. But that doesnt mean its fair or balanced. Any exploit is "smart". Its giving an unfair advantage. Taking that advantage is smart. BUT THAT DOESNT MEAN ITS FAIR OR BALANCED.

[Sandpit]

uhm again,

Mech Jumps, it is exposed for 4 seconds (example) it shoots

Show me where that mech isn't exposed for the exact same amount of time for another player to shoot back at it? Because it drops back down into cover faster and isn't exposed as long it somehow makes it impossible to hit for the 4 seconds it is exposed? It somehow makes it impossible for you to target them just as fast as they can target you?
Does it somehow take away your ability to point your weapons at the them they way they are pointing their weapons at you? It's not like they somehow prevent you from shooting them the exact same way they are shooting you. They are exposed just as much as they can see you.
I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how exactly poptarting prevents you from shooting back at them while they're exposed in mid-air with 0 cover head to toe and aren't even moving laterally so you don't even have to lead a shot on them.
I'm waiting for someone to explain to me how exactly poptarting allows them to shoot at you while taking away your ability to shoot back at them

They pop up. They're exposed completely for the exact same length of time you have to shoot back at them.

[Sandpit]

I understand some of you aren't arguing against poptarting but my whole point is, they don't ahve some magical ability to stop you from shooting back. I can shoot ballistics for pinpoint damage on them jsut the same as they can shoot it at me (although i prefer my beam weapons )

[YueFei]

WarZ, on 23 November 2013 - 04:06 PM, said:

Wrong. It takes less time for a jump jet mech to get airborne for a shot than it takes for the same mech to walk out of cover to fire its weapons. Then on top of that 'less time to get out to shoot', the mech instantly drops back into full cover. That means no time needed to slowly back pedal into cover. Overall the mech thats poptarting only needs to be exposed to enemy fire for about 1/3 'ish of the time that the same mech would be exposed if it were to walk out cover then back to cover (peek a boo).

But the poptarting mech gets to do its FULL alpha of damage, even though its exposed to enemy fire for a fraction of the amount of time a non poptarting mech would be.

That's really not the case. Someone jump shooting is exposed to you for the exact same amount of time that you are exposed to him.... it's called *line of sight* for a reason, that line connects the two of you. However, if you are grounded, you can shoot him when he's on his ascent... he cannot hit you until he lets off his jets. That means a grounded mech has twice as much time to shoot at the jump sniper. If you can hit him on the ascent, you can then break off and dodge, or defensively twist.

I am comfortable peeking over hills on foot. I just don't do it using the simple movement of rock forward, peek, rock backward. I move over it laterally, turn toward it, look, and then turn away. I'm not even that skilled at this, you should see the way Helmstif moves in his Hunchback. He glances for a split second, snap-shot fires his shoulder-mounted weaponry, twists away, and dives back behind the hill again.

Good jump snipers do something similar by traveling in a parabolic arc, rather than jumping straight up and down.

The true advantage of jump sniping lies in the ability to place shots from a position on the map that you normally would not be able to. That surprise factor is what leads many people to get shot by a jump sniper and not have enough time to adequately react and shoot back. The real issue is that you didn't expect to get shot from a particular direction. If you're expecting a jump sniper, you can hit him, and you can do it before he can get his own shot off.

Sandpit, on 23 November 2013 - 04:35 PM, said:

They pop up. They're exposed completely for the exact same length of time you have to shoot back at them.

The mech on the ground actually has twice as much time to shoot back. The jump sniper can't shoot on the way up due to the jump jet shake.

[Greyboots]

Sandpit, on 23 November 2013 - 04:35 PM, said:

uhm again,

Mech Jumps, it is exposed for 4 seconds (example) it shoots

Show me where that mech isn't exposed for the exact same amount of time for another player to shoot back at it?

The poptarting mech locks a target before poptarting. It pops up and fires the full 4 seconds (the reticle wobble makes little difference on large mechs even at substantial range).

An enemy mech sees the poptart, then has to line up on the target and fire for 4 seconds. So you lose .5 of a second getting a bead and then fire for the 3.5 seconds the mech is visible.

The mech is then below the line of sight again. However, now you still have projectiles in flight because many weapons take time to go from point A to point B. You, however, are still hit by any projectiles in flight from the pop tart. You can be losing another .5 to 1 second depending on the weapon's projectile speed. So:

• Because the mech poptarting can fire for 4 seconds and ALL bullets in travel at the time of hiding will still hit the target.
  
• The mech RETURNING fire loses the initial targeting time AND fire travel time.

Of course these can change depending on the poptart's weapon locations. For example, a Blackjack is an excellent poptart because of the very high arms. You will often get off a twin PPC shot and be back in cover before the enemy can get a bead on you. As long as you don't pop up from the same place repeatedly you can get away with this a LOT and a Blackjack isn't exactly a slow mech. Repositioning yourself quickly is a great advantage.

As opposed to a Cataphract for example. Very low arms mean that you spend an excessive amount of time being visible before you can fire back. Your arms are still below the firing level which gives your opponent time to get a bead on you and fire more damage back at the Cataphract than it will dish out.

So some mechs are better than others for pop tarting. It's not a universal "FTW" tactic and undoubtably some mechs will take a LOT more damage while doing it than they actually dish out. Undoubtably every jump-capable mech will do it at some point in time. Some mechs, however, are very very good at it because of their shape and where the weapons are mounted and there's no way you're going to take as much damage as you dish out unless multiple enemy mechs get a bead on you.

Quote

It somehow makes it impossible for you to target them just as fast as they can target you?

Well, yeah. All you ahve to do is poptart and shoot a mech that someone else has targeted. You'll have a mech targeted before you ever start your jump. So as long as you make sure no-one's got you targeted for them to leech off? Of course you'll target them faster than they can target you, your'e lining them up through a wall after all.

Quote

Does it somehow take away your ability to point your weapons at the them they way they are pointing their weapons at you?

100% a certainty.

Quote

II'm waiting for someone to explain to me how exactly poptarting allows them to shoot at you while taking away your ability to shoot back at them

Job done. The right mech with the right loadout and poptarts will frequently take no damage at all. IT's just not every mech that this applies to is all.

Anything past this is kind of pig-headed refusal to understand the truth OR pushing an alterior agenda really.

On a much more agreeable note: Pop tarting isn't going away. Don't worry about it. The simple fact is that it can't be controlled as much as people want it to be. And it shouldn't either. Walls of AC mechs advancing across the field need a counterbalance and this is one of them.

[Sandpit]

The issues you point out aren't a poptart exclusive. These are tactics used by intelligent pilots. I run a 5LL stalker a lot. I'm not built to brawl persay as my advantage is hanging outside of medium range and pew pewing. I will find a good spot a lot fo times and let my teammates draw attention, then once they have spotted a few targets for me, i peek out from behind cover and fire a nicely lined up alpha blast into a mech that had no idea I was there. Then fade back behind my cover. The only difference is I'm not jumping when I do it.

That's not "OP" that's just using my mech the way I've designed it to be used. 5LL into a stationary target will net me the same pinpoint damage as any ballistic. By the time the enemy mech realizes they've been ganked I'm safely behind my cover again. I wait until I see him taking flashes of damage again (which usually means he's now turning his attention to another mech) and do it all over again. I guess I'd be sidetarting since I peek out from behind a rock or some such usually. It's the EXACT same strategy

[Greyboots]

Sandpit, on 23 November 2013 - 06:08 PM, said:

The issues you point out aren't a poptart exclusive.

No, they aren't. Being common elements does not, in any way, effect the value of their uses when when assembled in the right way to maximise the effectiveness of poptarting.

Quote

That's not "OP" that's just using my mech the way I've designed it to be used. 5LL into a stationary target will net me the same pinpoint damage as any ballistic. By the time the enemy mech realizes they've been ganked I'm safely behind my cover again. I wait until I see him taking flashes of damage again (which usually means he's now turning his attention to another mech) and do it all over again. I guess I'd be sidetarting since I peek out from behind a rock or some such usually. It's the EXACT same strategy

I never once intimated that poptarting was OP or should be changed. Your point has obviously been clouded because you've got a bit of target fixation going on. I actually agree with you on the end result, I just differ on why that end result is just fine.

Poptarting is a valid tactic and I no longer see any reason why it should be removed or changed. The Devs have attacked it sufficiently as to remove enough power to make it "fair". Just because direct fire mechs can't wait for their Torsos to be cherry red before retreating to cover is NO reason to nerf pop-tarting or even LRMs. If they aren't good enough to know at what point to withdraw from a fight and survive then they deserve to be destroyed. They have made a tactical mistake and the consequences are a result of that mistake.

Where I stand on many things people complain about ad infinitum: MWO is supposed to be a "tactical" game. If a player wants to play it as a slug-fest then that is certainly that players perogative. They should, however, accept the tactical consequences of that choice; not run for the forums calling stuff OP when they made the choice to be very vulnerable to it in the first place.

Edited by Greyboots, 23 November 2013 - 06:59 PM.

[Sandpit]

Greyboots, on 23 November 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

No, they aren't. Being common elements does not, in any way, effect the value of their uses when when assembled in the right way to maximise the effectiveness of poptarting.



I never once intimated that poptarting was OP or should be changed. Your point has obviously been clouded because you've got a bit of target fixation going on. I actually agree with you on the end result, I just differ on why that end result is just fine.

Poptarting is a valid tactic and I no longer see any reason why it should be removed or changed. The Devs have attacked it sufficiently as to remove enough power to make it "fair". Just because direct fire mechs can't wait for their Torsos to be cherry red before retreating to cover is NO reason to nerf pop-tarting or even LRMs. If they aren't good enough to know at what point to withdraw from a fight and survive then they deserve to be destroyed. They have made a tactical mistake and the consequences are a result of that mistake.

Where I stand on many things people complain about ad infinitum: MWO is supposed to be a "tactical" game. If a player wants to play it as a slug-fest then that is certainly that players perogative. They should, however, accept the tactical consequences of that choice; not run for the forums calling stuff OP when they made the choice to be very vulnerable to it in the first place.

I'm not "arguing" with you. I'm merely pointing out how poptarting isn't this evil boogeyman many like to make it out to be. I'm not trying to be confrontational, jsut pointing out my opinion on the matter at hand.

[Commissar Aku]

It is a bit expensive but Advanced Target Decay eats poptarts.

Edited by XPH Aku, 23 November 2013 - 11:11 PM.

[KharnZor]

Sandpit, on 23 November 2013 - 07:09 PM, said:

I'm not "arguing" with you. I'm merely pointing out how poptarting isn't this evil boogeyman many like to make it out to be. I'm not trying to be confrontational, jsut pointing out my opinion on the matter at hand.

Nothing will convince the bads otherwise Sandpit no matter what you say.
The key to countering poptarts is mobility and map knowledge.
Know thy enemy and all that.

[Sandpit]

KharnZor, on 23 November 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:

Nothing will convince the bads otherwise Sandpit no matter what you say.
The key to countering poptarts is mobility and map knowledge.
Know thy enemy and all that.

I'm not as concerned with convincing them as making sure that is the devs actually read into this they understand that there are players who disagree with that opinion. I don't begrudge anyone their opinion but at the same time I'm going to ensure my opinion on the matter is heard in case DEVs are looking at what issues they think need to be balanced. That's why I post counter points so much, not because I want to convince them they're wrong (although I would like to think that sometimes especially with new players, that they can read through stuff like this and see that there are ways to counter it so they don't get out there and get owned) so much as I want to give examples of how another member of the player base sees it.

[Flyby215]

Just an observation... but what poptarts are we really annoyed with? Admittedly, I thoroughly enjoy it when a Jenner jumps clear over me pew-pewing mid-air as I try to track it over my head. That's actually fun (and nostalgic of Novas in MW2)! I've never had any particular problem with Blackjacks or Catapults jumping around either. Cataphracts, albeit more annoying, tend to be lesser armoured and often run XLs in jump configurations.

What poptarts actually bug the heck out of me (and likely, most players on this side of the argument)? The Highlander, and recently but less frequent, the Victor... assault classes utilizing their jump capability to offset their otherwise lumbering nature.

Yes, you can fire back at a pop-tart, but the pop-tart has the advantage. On the way up, the cockpit will crest first and the pop-tart can locate a target, get relatively close targeting, release the JJs, fine tune, fire, and hide quickly. The target, by contrast, needs to recognize the threat, swing the torso around, fine-tune while swinging (large and fine motions combined [harder to accomplish (human factors 101)]), and fire early to compensate for weapon travel time. Additionally, due to the short time a pop-tart has mid-air, weapons that require damage-over-time such as LLs/MLs have limited ability to return fire.

This is made even harder by the nature of going 'up and down'. I suppose it is just part of being ground-based creatures that we naturally have difficulty following something across 2-axes rather than one (or 3 rather than 2, depending how you want to look at this). Why do you think Halo/CoD players always jump while fighting, why hitting a duck [mid-air] is harder than a rabbit, why [airplane] pilots require so much more training than truckers, why in War Thunder pilots jolt up-and-down rather than side-to-side while under fire (unless they intend on winning a turn-fight). Simply put, it is harder for players to track up and down than it is side-to-side. (I wonder if this could also be related to the different muscles being used to move a mouse left/right vs up/down?)

Then we factor in the highly armoured assault class Highlanders/Victors that can easily absorb the limited (described above) return-fire, ultimately dishing out far more than recieved.

Ultimately, the pop-tart strategy is a highly advantageous strategy, and is thusly popular among players who value wins, kills, and c-bills.

As many point out, the tactic adds variety to gameplay which I'm sure we would all agree is good for the game. However, I would tend to think that the Highlander and Victor could still be toned down a few notches with respect to the pop-tart tactic. Perhaps the JJ shake should be far more violent for higher weight, or maybe gravity tends to be less forgiving (fall faster) with higher weight. Not really sure the answer here, but I am in support of dumbing down pop-tarting further than what has already been done.