78 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

[Sandpit]

When elementals get integrated I think they'll be op

They're weapon systems will have to be on par with mechs but they'll also have the advantage of miniscule hit boxes and op melee/physical attacks.

What they SHOULD do is limit the number allowed per drop or give them a separate queue.

[Master Maniac]

Okay, this community is effectively useless and downright toxic.

Wouldn't be surprised if half the people on this forum didn't turn out to be trolls paid for by the Hawken team.

I would also like to know why a completely insult-free retort was apparently moderated out of existence. That's not very sporting, now is it?

Edited by Master Maniac, 31 December 2013 - 04:03 PM.

[Mavairo]

FupDup, on 31 December 2013 - 12:41 PM, said:

?

It goes into the Urbanmech?

[Stelar 7]

Pt 2, and edited for bad text formatting.

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

Now, addressing the Ultras:

Ultra Autocannons in Battletech fire twice in one turn, with twice the heat, and twice the possibility for damage. This is all well and good, but their representation in the Mechwarrior games changes from title to title.

Ultra ACs are more or less redundant in their basic format considering the nature of the game, unless some core changes are made to how they work and what they do in order to differentiate them from their standard single-shot counterparts.

The primary motivation to make a ballistic weapon fire in short, rapid bursts is to increase the rate of fire - which goes hand in hand with damage done to a target - whilst minimizing the effects of harmonic destabilization.

In MWO, Ultra Autocannons could benefit from the advantage of firing more rapidly than single-shot AC's. An Ultra AC/10 could fire in a sharp two-point burst, discharging two 10-damage rounds within a half-second of one another. The first shot causes the targeting reticule to begin a climb, which will affect the placement of the second round fired. Of course, this shift in aim has more dramatic consequences the farther away the intended target is from the shooter. The second round transfers the full force of the recoil to the shooter, causing the reticule to jump away from the target with random, although capped, amounts of vertical and lateral disruption. The higher the caliber, the greater the recoil. This has the effect of making follow-up shots with other weapons more difficult to aim, given the need for manual aim correction forced by the recoil.

Ultra ACs would be unique among IS AC's in having a recoil mechanic at all, while Clan variants would have much stronger recoil effects, making them much less useful at range, as the second shot will be more inaccurate. Up close, however, Ultra ACs can be very powerful, doing twice the damage of a single-shot variety with a reasonable amount of precision - and a good chance of striking the same component of a target 'Mech.

This power comes with a price, however. The more Ultras are fired at once, the sharper the effect of recoil becomes, and the harder it is to compensate for. Of course, the recoil will affect the accuracy of a pilot's other weapons. It is therefore advisable to trigger multiple Ultras on chainfire in order to keep the targeting reticule as steady as possible across long ranges. At closer ranges, where reticule deviation becomes less important, the increased rate of fire of the Ultra AC can be quite beneficial, and the increased heat is the greater concern.

Most of this is fine, but the penalty here is recoil, not heat. Unless you are changing the traditional values of heat it will take many shots before the mechs using these get near the current high thresholds of the heat scale.

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

Ultra ACs can emulate the power of the next highest caliber, but generate more heat than would the single-shot equivalent. An Ultra 10 can deal 20 points of damage like an AC/20, but causes a bit more heat buildup than would an AC/20 on its own. An AC/20 generates 6 points of heat with a single shot, while an Ultra 10 generates 7.2 points.

Here you are losing me. I think a UAC 2 should hit for 4, not 5. More heat, less tonnage. Are you also keeping the jam mechanic? Perhaps making it worse?

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

Ultra ACs also require more time to reload. A standard AC/10 has a 2.5 second reload time. An Ultra AC/10 requires 3.5 seconds to reload, while the lighter, more compact Clan version requires 4 seconds.

Interesting this would make the UAC 10 fire faster than the AC 20.

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

The net gain of choosing an Ultra AC over its single shot counterpart is the increased probability that two shots will hit a target in the same area of the body, leaving less room for the enemy to evade, and narrowing the margin of error between two slower shots. This effect is much more practical as distance between the shooter and the target decreases. At longer ranges, a single-shot autocannon is often more useful.

Then again, the advantage of equipping an Ultra AC of a lower caliber over a standard AC of a higher caliber is reduced weight and a greater abundance of the smaller caliber ammunition per ton.

So you didn't mention the jam chance at all in that. I still see things being high alpha. I expect PGI will use ghost heat, a lot, on UAC. Are you proposing to keep that mechanic or do something else with the heat?

Edited by Stelar 7, 31 December 2013 - 04:40 PM.

[Stelar 7]

Ok Part 1 appears to have vanished into the aether.. here is another go.

I was looking back and I see you edited your post. I shall now address your points.

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

"You just compared a video game to real life."

*shakes head sadly*

Okay, I'm marking you down as an irredeemable troll and moving right along.

pointing out flaws in your logic is not trolling. It is criticism. there is a difference and part of it is my total lack of malice.

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

"UAC 20 yadda yadda yadda"

Yeah, I said I didn't put much consideration to it. I literally came up with a rough idea in like 10 seconds, you miserable, miserable little troll of a man. I would *happily* go into depth about it. And apparently I will, because it torments you on a personal level for me to do so.

See this is just you being nasty. You came up with a bad mechanic, I pointed that out, and while you now agree with me that it's a bad mechanic I'm some kind of horrible person? I think you should take this a lot less personally.

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

"Making up repercussions on the spot."

You are pathetic.

Did you suggest anywhere in your post that firing 4 or more AC would lead to instadeath before I pointed out the logical result of modable slot layout and massive tonnage savings?

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

"Still since the recoil can be corrected in less time than it takes for a laser to burn out, I think that heavy balisic builds will be just fine."

Blind assumption, given the fact that you clearly have no idea how this recoil effect would function, nor how strong it will be, or how difficult it will be to adjust for.

This is from YOUR example. You stated that the medium lasers fired in alpha with the AC 20 would still be shooting after the pilot corrected their aim.

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

"YOU'RE JUST ADDING IN AMMO EXPLOSIONS?!"

Really? I mean...really? That's like the cherry on top of your #*%@ sundae.

You are, there is no mechanic other than critical hits that generates an ammo explosion currently. Heat will kill a mech, but not because of ammo. If you don't believe me boat up some PPC on whatever you have that can carry them and shoot till you see your CT go red. (no ammo needed)

But hey, if you just meant 4 AC 10 of some clan flavor would cause enough heat to = the 6 to 8 IS PPC it takes to insta BBQ a mech, OK.

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

"Where's your numbers?!"

I'm brainstorming functionality - how weapons could perform in a way that differentiates them from standard Inner Sphere weapons. Rebranded IS weapons that work exactly the same but with slightly different numbers are boring. I'm doing a general, sweeping analysis of how I *think* Clan weapons could work in the game. But you already know this. You're just taking the opportunity to gratify yourself by acting like a **** in an online forum, because of some personal deficiency. Which is really too bad.

Nope, I'm asking because you are telling me that boated AC will cause mechs to explode. That is vastly in excess of the heat values for the weapons we are talking about and you used this very detail to tell me I was floundering in my counter argument. That made the numbers specifically relevant and so I asked for them.

On a side note, I think you need to do a lot less internet psycho-analysis. I am not angry, not even a little. I think that some of your ideas are likely to have catastrophic consequences. You seem to be reading that as a personal attack.

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

Can I do numbers? You bet your arse I could. Could I nail the mechanics? Sure, I definitely could. This is an off day. A day I look forward to enjoying some MWO on. I have to go to sleep early and go to work at 7 in the morning. You want stats and number crunching, then you're going to have to wait for a weekend. I'm not getting paid for this, troglodyte.

Then don't argue specific effects based on numbers that you don't have. Or at least have the decency to be honest about it, and state that what you meant was that lots of AC would have a ghost heat mechanic, or something, that causes instant death for alpha strikes. That wasn't in your OP and you acted like I should know that when I pointed out the boating and alpha striking risk of your idea. You might also want to take some time off and think about why you can't accept criticism without viewing it as a personal attack.

Master Maniac, on 31 December 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

I feel bad for this game's community. I'd heard that it was bad, but I had no idea that it was *this* bad. I'm sick of your bilious attitude. Don't expect any further direct replies, and if you persist with the insults, I will happily report you.

Report me for what precisely? Disagreeing with you? Being a liberal?

[Praehotec8]

Before you suggest longer burn times on clan lasers with most of the damage loaded on the end of the burn, I suggest you try a few rounds with a joystick. Try tracking fast moving targets at medium to long (or any range at all, for that matter) with lasers and see how effective you are. It's nigh impossible to get most of the beam where you want it, and only slightly less difficult to get all the beam to hit the mech. ACs in which you lead your target, and pulse lasers with short durations are much more effective.

Now I freely admit I am an average player, but this is certainly an area in which creating balance only for those few elite who are that skilled with a steady hand and high-end mouse would be detrimental to the general population of the game. I submit that most players will be unable to utilize your proposed weapons to the effectiveness that would make it worth using them over standard IS weapons. As a warrior of Clan Wolf, I oppose this.

Your LRM idea is interesting, and might be worth checking out, however.

[Stelar 7]

I don't have much sympathy for joy stick users. Like refusing to use comms that is a self imposed limitation.

I think that longer burn times with even damage distribution would be a step towards balance for clan lasers. Something still needs to account for the large tonnage and critical slot advantage.

I am curious how the proposed pulse laser mechanic would play out. I am not certain it would be useful. A lot would depend on the timing.

[Praehotec8]

Stelar 7, on 31 December 2013 - 06:47 PM, said:

I don't have much sympathy for joy stick users. Like refusing to use comms that is a self imposed limitation.

Using a mechanic supported by the game's software (and the way, I would argue, Mechwarrior was always meant to be played) is a self-imposed limitation? Then you follow that by saying not using a 3rd party software to join with a group of people (and have to conform to the rules of their guild in the process) is also self-imposed limitation. You're being more than a bit unfair to those who don't wish to play as you do, AND a bit unrealistic. If nothing else, is your avatar in the cockpit holding a mouse, or a HOTAS setup?

Joystick use ought to be just as viable as mouse use (and it is currently as long as you choose your loadout and tactics accordingly). However, what the OP is suggesting would make it more advantageous for joystick users to play as IS. I have sided with Clan Wolf since MW2, and think I ought not to be gimping myself to use a clan mech with a joystick. To suggest that it is my fault for choosing to use a joystick is intolerant at best.

Why not have a mechanic for clan lasers like the gauss? A charge-up time, followed by a shorter burn duration with higher heat. Perhaps limit their range, as that fits better with the image of warriors who believe in engaging in honorable 1 v 1 combat? Perhaps a longer cooldown? There are other ways to limit their advantage, and burn duration is simply the easiest (read: laziest) way, albeit the way PGI will likely choose.

I would go so far as to argue that, aside from range limitation, if a player can handle the heat management from pulse lasers, they can be used more effectively in certain situations compared to standard situations, because you can torso twist in combat more quickly, and will have chance to put more damage where you want it on an opponent who is twisting. I think this would fit the clans better than extreme sniper range weaponry.

[Stelar 7]

Man I am making friends on this thread. I am glad the game supports joystick use. I am on record as upset with PGA for both the lack of in game comms and the crappy non comms communication. That said there are PGI comms servers and no you don't need to join a restrictive group to get access. There are plenty of easy going groups you can join. Fact is the joy stick does not drive as well as a mouse why should we limit balance to accommodate minority players when the minority status is self imposed? Because the graphics? That is like arguing we should wear masks because our avatars do. Silly.

If the balance can be had in a way that works for sick users great but no I don't see the need to limit options for players who choose to limit themselves.

If It were a access issue for people with a physical handicap I would fight with you for access. This is not like that.

As for all your I am pompous la de da you are the one demanding your minority playstyle be accommodated.

[Praehotec8]

Stelar 7, on 31 December 2013 - 10:30 PM, said:

If the balance can be had in a way that works for sick users great but no I don't see the need to limit options for players who choose to limit themselves.

I had to laugh at your typo.

Look, I'm not saying you're pompous, I just think you're being shortsighted and a bit unfair. Joystick support IS a part of the game. Yes, it isn't as good as the mouse (although I think if they made mouse input behave more like the joystick in terms of responsiveness, there would me much less crying about the evils of pinpoint aiming). However, as it is part of the game, the game balance must keep joystick in mind.

I can use the mouse as well as most, but I choose not to, as I find it less entertaining. In doing so, I accept the limitations of the peripheral of my choice. That does not mean that no regard should be paid to ensuring that users such as myself have an entertaining and balanced experience.

Plus, as I mentioned, longer beam durations is a significant nerf for a laser, even for mouse users. I think there are better ways to balance clan lasers...my vote is for shorter range actually, but there are other options as well. I actually think PGI has an opportunity to make the clan tech useful for warriors who believe in the honor of 1 on 1 duels as opposed to (as others have said) warriors who simply walk backwards firing while staying out of Inner sphere engagement ranges.

As for comms...well, sometimes some of us aren't in the mood to deal with the chatter of others. I have tried being in a guild, but I'm taking a hiatus from it for now. Sometimes it's just easier to jump on, play a round, and leave rather than waiting to get a 4-man going. In-game comms WITH a mute button might work better.

At any rate, Happy New Year!

[Stelar 7]

Yeah phone post, sometimes that swipe text thing spells for me. I understand that some don;t like to hear others, I agree any in game coms will need a mute button that is easy and quick to use.

Like I said I'm ok with consideration for Joystick users as long as the game is not hurt for the rest to accomodate them. I would prefer code that let them function at the same level as the mice as that ought to solve all the drama. My joystick has not seen use sinced X-Wing Alliance but I really liked the play with MW3. Now I'm just used to the mouse. I had the same kind of transition between WWII online and WOT.

Basically though, happy new year.

[TheCaptainJZ]

I like your proposals and the reasoning behind them. You seem to want to keep Clans powerful, but design it so you have to be more skilled to make use of that power and the downfall to the Clans is if they are focus fired on (since they have more tunnel vision when fighting). I like this.

I like longer recycle times on the AC's as well as a small reticle shake (we know this is doable in game). More heat as well.

I like the idea of changing the spread patterns for LRMs. Also, I think if you fire them too close to you (say, 90m) there could be a feedback that damages yourself (maybe your armor, maybe just the weapon itself?). Maybe you can actually destroy your launcher by firing too close! The damage per missile can also be lowered if that still doesn't seem balanced, or the flight time increased. I'm not sure I want to change the locking mechanism. I sorta like it in principle, but I would hate it in practice. Changing locking times and forcing a relock every volley sounds good. You could force it to fire one volley and wait for it to land before loosing the lock and firing again. I'm not sure I like that either, but it's an idea.

The laser idea was already put forth by PGI and I think that is the best solution--longer beam duration.

I'm not sure how I feel about the pulse lasers. It'd be nice to try!

One suggestion I have is to make clan tech more fragile. once armor is gone, it is easier to destroy those weapons with lower health values and greater chances of ammo explosion. Clan mechs should be more powerful for a short engagement, but less durable and weaker during longer engagements.

Along those lines, the ER PPC cannot be as strong as it's supposed to be. To be honest, for PPCs I sorta liked MechAssaults mechanism where you have to charge them and you can charge them to different power levels before releasing. That would be difficult to use here but I always thought it was a neat mechanism that suited it. I suppose you could give it a sort of charge up but you can tap and fire immediately for less damage (say 10), or charge for a brief period for like a second for 15 damage (and varying amounts inbetween). We could also make PPCs explode like gauss rifles do (again, to make mechs more fragile).

These are just a couple thoughts I had to make things interesting, without changing the base stats.

[shellashock]

TheCaptainJZ, on 01 January 2014 - 02:39 AM, said:

Along those lines, the ER PPC cannot be as strong as it's supposed to be. To be honest, for PPCs I sorta liked MechAssaults mechanism where you have to charge them and you can charge them to different power levels before releasing. That would be difficult to use here but I always thought it was a neat mechanism that suited it. I suppose you could give it a sort of charge up but you can tap and fire immediately for less damage (say 10), or charge for a brief period for like a second for 15 damage (and varying amounts inbetween). We could also make PPCs explode like gauss rifles do (again, to make mechs more fragile).

These are just a couple thoughts I had to make things interesting, without changing the base stats.

I think that the MechAssault way could be worth trying out for MW:O. A slow moving ball of energy that delivers 10 instant damage to wherever it hits with a charge level to damage ratio. You would have to remove the very high tracking naturally or ppcs would be the new "no skill weapon" ct only streaks. And with its new low speed, you might be able to justify lowering the heat by a point or half a point.

[Dirkdaring]

Personally I see it as 1 or the other.

1. Clan weapons will be as they are supposed to be, 30% or so better across the board. The game has to compensate in mech tonnage and numbers for the difference. IE: Give each side 800 tons. Clan mechs are worth 150% tonnage or something.

2. Clan weapons will be nerfed to stupidity making clans a laughing stock of what they are supposed to be.

Seeing what the Devs have already said so far, I'm voting that #2 will happen..

Edited by Dirkdaring, 01 January 2014 - 07:23 AM.

[Master Maniac]

Stelar 7, on 31 December 2013 - 10:30 PM, said:

As for all your I am pompous la de da you are the one demanding your minority playstyle be accommodated.

And he is wondering why he's 'not making any friends.'

Oh, well. Off to work. Will "address" things when I get back.

TheCaptainJZ, on 01 January 2014 - 02:39 AM, said:

I like your proposals and the reasoning behind them. You seem to want to keep Clans powerful, but design it so you have to be more skilled to make use of that power and the downfall to the Clans is if they are focus fired on (since they have more tunnel vision when fighting). I like this.

I like longer recycle times on the AC's as well as a small reticle shake (we know this is doable in game). More heat as well.

I like the idea of changing the spread patterns for LRMs. Also, I think if you fire them too close to you (say, 90m) there could be a feedback that damages yourself (maybe your armor, maybe just the weapon itself?). Maybe you can actually destroy your launcher by firing too close! The damage per missile can also be lowered if that still doesn't seem balanced, or the flight time increased. I'm not sure I want to change the locking mechanism. I sorta like it in principle, but I would hate it in practice. Changing locking times and forcing a relock every volley sounds good. You could force it to fire one volley and wait for it to land before loosing the lock and firing again. I'm not sure I like that either, but it's an idea.

The laser idea was already put forth by PGI and I think that is the best solution--longer beam duration.

I'm not sure how I feel about the pulse lasers. It'd be nice to try!

One suggestion I have is to make clan tech more fragile. once armor is gone, it is easier to destroy those weapons with lower health values and greater chances of ammo explosion. Clan mechs should be more powerful for a short engagement, but less durable and weaker during longer engagements.

Along those lines, the ER PPC cannot be as strong as it's supposed to be. To be honest, for PPCs I sorta liked MechAssaults mechanism where you have to charge them and you can charge them to different power levels before releasing. That would be difficult to use here but I always thought it was a neat mechanism that suited it. I suppose you could give it a sort of charge up but you can tap and fire immediately for less damage (say 10), or charge for a brief period for like a second for 15 damage (and varying amounts inbetween). We could also make PPCs explode like gauss rifles do (again, to make mechs more fragile).

These are just a couple thoughts I had to make things interesting, without changing the base stats.

That is a very novel mechanic for the PPC. I quite like it.

Be careful mentioning 'Mechassault' around here, though. The PC Gaming Master Race tends to shriek in horror upon hearing of it.

Edited by Master Maniac, 01 January 2014 - 07:29 AM.

[Vanguard319]

how to balance PPCs:

Clan ER PPCs have the same heat as the IS version, but have an increased recharge time to compensate for the increased damage.

As far as LRMs go, I think they should retain indirect fire, but only able to do so when getting targeting data from a TAG or UAV. This would allow clan units to use indirect fire, but only when it is considered as part of the clan force's battle plan instead of something that can be improvised during the match (less battlefield flexibility)

[TheCaptainJZ]

Master Maniac, on 01 January 2014 - 07:25 AM, said:

That is a very novel mechanic for the PPC. I quite like it.

Be careful mentioning 'Mechassault' around here, though. The PC Gaming Master Race tends to shriek in horror upon hearing of it.

Oh I know, it's like heresy. Still, the mechanic of PPCs was something I thought was interesting and something we might be able to adapt to this game. The greatest problem is when you try to mix ppcs with other weapons. I would never make it homing, and I wouldn't slow it way down but how long you hold the trigger could decide how much damage it does.

Just click it, and it goes off like normal. But for added damage, hold it longer which means you have to pick your shots better like with gauss. Also, in MechAssault, there was a penalty if you kept it charged. It would start overheating you or damaging you.

Edited by TheCaptainJZ, 01 January 2014 - 04:28 PM.

[Egomane]

Master Maniac, on 30 December 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

Varent, on 30 December 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

Nice post.

Why isnt it here?

http://mwomercs.com/...ctive-feedback/

Because oh gosh oh my is that thread a black gaping hole of no possible return. It's also mostly a "feedback" thread for a response to their proposals - not really meant to be a place to make suggestions of your own.

At least my interpretation, anyway.

They have concepts and you have yours. How is it bad to present yours to them in a thread where they specifically asked for feedback on how to design the clans? It's much easier for them to find your ideas there, compared to them having to look through all the forums.

Even more so, because we have a feature suggestion forum. If you want to propose ideas, that's the place to go. Not the forum for balance discussions. That is the wrong place for such a thread and there is a much higher probability that it will be overlooked because it was in wrong place from the very beginning.

Please use the official clan feedback thread for your clan balance and game mechanic suggestions.
http://mwomercs.com/...ctive-feedback/

Closed!