362 replies to this topic

[Adiuvo]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 December 2013 - 10:13 AM, said:

Have you tried this? Seriously Jobe? Have you hopped in a Atlas and tried to do what you are claiming CAN be done? I ran a D-DC for Months, an any half way decent Light Pilot could stay out of my cross hairs while I'm sporting a 350 XL engine! The only way I could tag one is if I made an effort to anticipate his next move and opened up with a alpha full of Ballistics, Lasers an SRMs. I personally never see the likes of you in game anymore St, so I will conclude you are in a higher Elo than I. Maybe, just maybe the guys(and gals) you are dropping against are just better shots than me, have a better rig(computer) than you, or ar luckier than you.

At top Elo there are plenty of people that can.

Example:

[Trauglodyte]

I agree with what is being said. I also agree that, especially in the case of the 3D, Victor, and Highlander, JJs allow for way too much additional agility. What I want to point out, though, is that the information being given there by A (I can't remember the name right now so my bad on that) is based within a vaccum where the Light Mech is keeping a single range within an "orbit" around the Assault/Heavy Mech and that the Assault/Heavy Mech is fully specced out with a high rated engine and max efficiencies. In that case, the Assault and Heavy, with wide arcing arm angles, can keep the target in sight IF they maintain 50ms ish. BUT, the second that Light pilot is replaced by someone with brains and stops the idiotic noob fascination with circling and cuts the angle, the Assault is in trouble. Toss in some JJs and it gets much worse. This then forces the Assault/Heavy to back step and twist which just screws them even more because you're now in a guessing game as to where the target is going to be. It is extremely difficult to stay in the 6 of any mech worth a damn unless we're talking about the short angle Stalkers and, even then, it is very hard to do.

Now, that isn't to say that the OP and his backers are wrong nor is it saying that those against the OP and his backers are right. Circumstances are everything. What I will say is that probably the driver of this topic is someone in an Atlas, Awesome, Orion, etc got hosed by a JJing badass in a Spider or Jenner. Nobody complains about people running Cicadas or Locusts. And nobody in a JJing Assault that is a good pilot complains about those mechs cause they know how to abuse the added maneuverability.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 10 December 2013 - 02:44 PM.

[Murzao]

Step 1: Fix SRMs

But yea if they restricted JJ turn/twist speed to normal ground turn/twist speed it wouldn't be a no-brainer to take JJ.

[Wispsy]

Sandpit, on 10 December 2013 - 08:38 AM, said:

It doesn't though. Period. Assault mechs cannot keep up with a light.
Whether it's twisting speed, twisting arc, or movement speed.

If you are constantly getting tracked by an assault mech while piloting a light try getting in closer and face hugging a bit more. I'm offering a different tactic to you because again I think it's good where it's at.

Well they can...no matter what you do.

[Hoaggie]

DaZur, on 10 December 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

Alright…let’s dispense with this foolery.

I completely appreciate the point where Artgathan and Stjobe are coming from. At face value, yes it’s makes practical sense that a light should be more “maneuverable” than a Medium and a Medium more so than a Heavy and a Heavy more so than an Assault…. Even if you dispense with BT universe magic… it’s just sound logic.

I also appreciate the premise that PGI is negligent in recognizing this aspect by affording all mechs regardless of their weight class and design, the same axial rotation speed of 41.8 dps and turn radius of 24.7 meters.

All this being said… you guys are out of your flipping minds…

A mech rotating at 41.8 dps (Lets make is 42 for clean math) means a mech can rotate a full 360 degrees in roughly 8.6 seconds… You read that right, 8.6 seconds.

So exactly how much slower do you think an assault mech should pivot on its axis?

- Rotational speed measures how quickly an object rotates about the objects axis of rotation.
- For rotational speed we are concerned with how many radians an object has rotated through in some interval of time. (41.8 degrees-per-second or 360 degrees in 8.6 seconds)
- Tangential speed is concerned with the linear speed of an object, and the objects distance from the axis of rotation.
- Tangential speed acts tangent to the circular path the object is traveling along.



As this relates to MW:O and this discussion:

For the sake of simplicity of argument we’ll use make-believe math… Mech “A” = the targeting mech rotating on its axis tracking a target mech = “B”.

The farther mech “B” is from mech “A” the less axial rotation is required to maintain its facing on mech “B”. As mech “B” closes distance with mech “A” as some point midway, the axial rotation speed is equal to mech “B”s tangential rotation speed. As mech “B” proceed past that point, “B”s tangential rotational speed exceeds “A”s axial rotation speed.

In short… “math” is working as expected.

Assaults and heavies don't need their “agility” nerfed. At 42 degrees-per-second… they are abhorrently slow already.

What needs to happen as I alluded to in the opening is PGI needs to recognize the weight classes should not all have the same sized turn radius… ever.

TL,DR: You guys are approaching the "agility" problem from the wrong direction... Axial rotation speeds are fine, it's the turn radius of the lower mechs that need to be adjusted.

Well ******* said. You are one logical ************.

I'm quoting your entire comment in the hope that one of these guys reads it.

[Rhent]

A properly piloted light, can zoom in and destroy an assault. By properly piloted, it means that they use their advantage, such as:
-Lights with long range weapons vs assaults with short range weapons could easily kite an atlas to death
-Lights with brawler weapons can get well within the turn radius of an assault and fire on them, and the assault will have trouble returning fire. If there was tripping this wouldn't be possible, but without tripping, just hug the Atlas.
-Straffing runs on unsuspecting assaults from the back side or while they are engaged can do a large amount of damage

If you come in and fight an Assault without using your full advantage, you are going to have a bad day. Or if you pick a fight with an assault with streaks and the proper modules, again you are going to have a bad day. Pick your fight and fight it on your own term.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

The boost from the Engine on turning and twist speeds still needs to change. I'd say set a single turning and twist speeds directly to mechs regardless of engine choice. Then any quirks can be added to individual variants.

That way the Engine Rating only influences straight line speeds. Then consider modifying or simply removing the Basic Efficiency boosts from the Mech Tree for at least Heavies and Assaults. They will be slightly slowed but not by too much, if fair values are selected.

So I cooked up a quick table, so I also apologize in advance for any errors, that shows how mechs relate to each other in terms of their agility, if we stayed close to their stock engine, and how that engine rating influences turn, torso twist and arm speed with the mech efficiencies.




So after making that table I wondered if what can be done is set Agility Archetypes similar in nature to the Movement Archetypes?

Perhaps something like this could be tested out with the known formulas to see if these kinds of values can work:

20-40: Locust, Jenner, Commando, Spider, Raven, Cicada

• Turn Speed: 91.72°/s 3.93s
  
• H. Torso Twist: 160°/s
  
• V. Torso Twist: 90°/s
  
• Arm Speed: 360°/s

45-60: Blackjack, Centurion, Dragon, Trebuchet, Shadowhawk, Quickdraw, Hunchback

• Turn Speed: 57.32°/s 6.28s
  
• H. Torso Twist: 125°/s
  
• V. Torso Twist: 56°/s
  
• Arm Speed: 225°/s

65-80: Awesome, Catapult, JagerMech, Cataphract, Orion, Thunderbolt

• Turn Speed: 45.86°/s 7.85s
  
• H. Torso Twist: 80°/s
  
• V. Torso Twist: 45°/s
  
• Arm Speed: 180°/s

85-100: Atlas, Highlander, Victor, Stalker, Battlemaster

• Turn Speed: 34.39°/s 10.47s
  
• H. Torso Twist: 60°/s
  
• V. Torso Twist: 33°/s
  
• Arm Speed: 135°/s

So these are just ideas to discuss the issue further and to see if something like this can work.

And with the mechs 20 to 40 tons I am aware that using the biggest engines and with the Efficiencies it gets harder to aim with how fast they respond, so one can often over correct for example so there is a benefit there in capping the speed some, just not sure where that threshold lies for those mechs though.

[Ahja]

BAHAHAAH! Oh poster you're a bust up. You said Agility needs to be reduced but really wanted abillity reduced right? Silly you.

[kapusta11]

I failed to see the reason why mechs speed should be nerfed, can somebody explain in two words?

[Nothing Whatsoever]

kapusta11, on 11 December 2013 - 02:07 AM, said:

I failed to see the reason why mechs speed should be nerfed, can somebody explain in two words?

Role Warfare

[kapusta11]

Praetor Shepard, on 11 December 2013 - 02:15 AM, said:

Role Warfare

And where is the connection between mechs turning speed and role warfare? I'm asking bacause everything I've seen in this topic so far were a moot points. So "assault can track a light", so what, does he able to hit specific part? Or "mediums have no role", of course they haven't, they are broken, they have too few armor and move at the speed where hiting them is not a problem, loadout is garbage as well.

Edited by kapusta11, 11 December 2013 - 03:03 AM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

kapusta11, on 11 December 2013 - 02:51 AM, said:

And where is the connection between mechs turning speed and role warfare? I'm asking bacause everything I've seen in this topic so far were a moot points. So "assault can track a light", so what, does he able to hit specific part? Or "mediums have no role", of course they haven't, they are broken, they have too few armor and move at the speed where hiting them is not a problem, loadout is garbage as well.

Well, to restate (since others have answered better both in this thread and here than I can), one of issues being raised has been how the Mech Tree provides too much of a boost with Basic Efficiencies to all mechs when doubled from fully Eliting said mech. Combine those along with how higher than stock Engine Ratings and Speed Tweak further improve all mechs to the point where bigger mechs have fewer exploitable weaknesses than smaller mechs and we get what we have with some mechs that are thought of as broken or garbage (And ironically Lights and Cicadas can get harder to pilot at max engine due to how hyper-responsive they can get, but they need the extra speed due to how fast and agile other mechs are in relation, so it's a Catch-22 right now making it harder than it probably should be).

As you bring up, there is not much point to bringing Medium mechs to an MWO match, where lore-wise they were the main force for the majority of Inner Sphere factions. Trying to over engine a Medium can leave for a weak loadout for about half of the medium mechs (and if using XL a bit vulnerable due to lower armor values compared to Heavies). Try to run stock engine or slightly under-engine and you are likely to be just as fast and agile (or possibly even slower and less agile than an XL loaded) Heavy that has more armor and likely an equal or better loadout too.

Then Lights often need to be played more like opportunistic vultures on the battlefield since most mechs are so mobile that scouting can be done just as well by other mechs (especially bad on smaller maps), acting as a Striker only works for so long before get plastered by the bigger mechs, and they end up with is a need for speed to compete as a nuisance.

So, basically allowing Assaults and Heavies to gain so many benefits in speed and agility, allows them to easily overextend outside of what their traditional roles are supposed to be on the battlefield. Consequently leaving less for Lights and Mediums to fulfill and be useful, while also making them easier targets if any mistakes are made by the player running in a light or a medium. Matchmaker doesn't help much when there are 4 mans stacking things for or against their favor depending on what they run

Things like focus fire and uneven odds during the flow of a match like a 2 v 1 or 3 v 1 situation and so on can skew these discussions some, but I hope I'm making enough sense here in trying to answer your question as to how this discussion on agility connects to Role Warfare.

[Joseph Mallan]

Adiuvo, on 10 December 2013 - 01:40 PM, said:

At top Elo there are plenty of people that can.

Example:

For one, at the top Elo there should not be "plenty of people". That kinda is the point of being an Elite player. And also at the Top Elo it is expected that you should be capable of such tasks. I mean really? Show me the average Joe's doing these things and you may have a point but showing me the "Top Players" doing it is expected IYAM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Praetor Shepard, on 11 December 2013 - 02:15 AM, said:

Role Warfare

Meet the Charger and Berserker! 2 fairly nimble mechs. One that was designed to be able to engage in physical combat. Combat that being said being slow moving would reduce the effectiveness of punching, kicking & Hair pulling... wait, scratch that last one!

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 December 2013 - 04:59 AM, said:

Meet the Charger and Berserker! 2 fairly nimble mechs. One that was designed to be able to engage in physical combat. Combat that being said being slow moving would reduce the effectiveness of punching, kicking & Hair pulling... wait, scratch that last one!

Well, maybe the Dragon Slayer can be an MWO analog to the Charger, with the current mechs.

We just need MASC and we could almost either use the Boar's Head or D-DC for the Berserker.

Then we'd need some melee damage for fists and feet.

I'm kinda partial to the the Axman, myself if we can get melee.

[Joseph Mallan]

I'd prefer a Slayer with a lil more bite.

The Axman was a bit under rated in my circles.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 December 2013 - 05:21 AM, said:

I'd prefer a Slayer with a lil more bite.

The Axman was a bit under rated in my circles.

I just looked at the Charger 1A1, the later variants were better loaded for combat as I look more closely at them.

Too bad about the Axman being underrated; an AC/20, a Hatchet and LPL with Jump Jets and backup MLs seems to make it a formidable brawler. Even with an XL and long CT due tho the head shape, I think it would still be a rather effective mech, if it could eventually make it into MWO in the future.

[Nimura Nekogami]

Adiuvo, on 09 December 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

Anyways, there's a reason why it's pretty well agreed upon in the competitive community that a top light pilot will lose to a top assault pilot 1v1, no matter the situation. Assaults move to quickly for the quick damage they're able to deal compared to a light's ability to maneuver.

Isnt it supposed to be like this? A 35 ton Mech shouldnt take out an 80+ ton Mech alone.
ahhhhhh i get it......you want to f*** Assaults again like in CB. (we all did this )

Cant agree with some of you guys here. Tons should matter all the time. This is Battletech not Quake. If you cant realise that a 50 ton Mech should loose against an 100 ton Mech you dont have Battletech in your mind.
(or read to many times the "Grey Death" books )
Why arent you guys playing Hawken? I assume in Hawken the tons arent that much of an factor.

Im sorry but i dont get the idea behind this thread and this discussion.

[Joseph Mallan]

Praetor Shepard, on 11 December 2013 - 06:46 AM, said:

I just looked at the Charger 1A1, the later variants were better loaded for combat as I look more closely at them.

Too bad about the Axman being underrated; an AC/20, a Hatchet and LPL with Jump Jets and backup MLs seems to make it a formidable brawler. Even with an XL and long CT due tho the head shape, I think it would still be a rather effective mech, if it could eventually make it into MWO in the future.

They gave up some speed or were given an XL to have those better load outs but yeah the A5A was a favorite, just needed to have the double sinks the Blackjack was given!

[Trauglodyte]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 December 2013 - 04:51 AM, said:

For one, at the top Elo there should not be "plenty of people". That kinda is the point of being an Elite player. And also at the Top Elo it is expected that you should be capable of such tasks. I mean really? Show me the average Joe's doing these things and you may have a point but showing me the "Top Players" doing it is expected IYAM.

Well, in the video that he posted, you're basically looking at a top pilot handling a poor pilot. Much like the guy that provided the math to back up the OP (why can't I remember his name?), the X-5 pilot in the vid held his range and orbited the Highlander. The Highlander pilot, in turn, combated that by back turning and pivoting, not trying to twist to match the orbit, and used his JJs when he wanted to pivot to match the orbit. Instead of recognizing this or preventing the Highlander from doing so, the X-5 kept doing the same thing. Now, he was smart in seeing the dual PPCs so he wanted to stay within 90m to keep the damage down to just the AC20. But, even doing that, he still screwed himself by not changing up his pathing. Running figure 8s is a much better choice, especially given the torso twist angle of the Cicada. And, he could have done a much better job of staying behind the mech.

In either case, the Highlander pilot has all of the tools at his disposal to prevent the X-5 from doing much to him while also keeping the enemy in his front arc. That, unfortunately, is part of the problem. Though, as I said up top, it is more of an issue with JJs than anything else. Any less agility for mechs in general and the game would get really really stale. I think that a lot of Light pilots need to get it through their heads that zooming through the lines and 1v1ing Assaults isn't what they're supposed to do. But, that is a topic for another day.