40 replies to this topic

[Trauglodyte]

Praehotec8, on 17 January 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:

You're missing the biggest problem with pulse lasers, especially the LPL.

Well, you're kind of glossing over something here. The LPL vs the ER Lrg: Both cost 8.5 heat per pull of the trigger. The LPL, due to its shorter beam duration fires 0.4s faster. Disregarding range, you're actually building up more heat over time than you would with the ER Lrg for only a small bump in damage in a more precise spot. The problem wih the pulse lases is really less about damage done and tonnage and more about heat and recycle time. You end up getting taxed more and more often with the PL than you do with the normal.

As an aside, the Md Laser vs. MPL isn't a big deal and the Sm Laser vs SPL is even less of an issue as they both have the same range. When it comes to short ranged energy weapons, you've typically got the tonnage to spare so that isn't the problem. It is just that the differences in the Lrg and LPL are so stagger and you're left with the issue of spending 7 tons for what amounts for 2 Md Lasers when you could just take a PPC for the same damage and heat but with more range.

Bagheera, on 17 January 2014 - 09:07 AM, said:

SRMs:

Step 2: Use Tennex's proposed flight path.

(It took me forever to find this, too bad I can't quote it, but it is in the archive)

http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

Step 3: Tune damage appropriately.

It amazes me that people are still pushing for this. Do you even know why they changed the flight pattern and spread of SRMs? It is because {Surat} and bads were running around face hugging and demolition derby piloting so that all of their missiles hit one spot. Centurion pilots were going nuts just running smack dab into mechs to get them to stop so that they could pull the trigger and laugh at how awesome they were. SRMs need the spread so that it prevents the bads from screwin gup the game for the rest of us. I'm just sad that the missiles no longer attempt to converge on your reticle like they used to do.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 17 January 2014 - 02:08 PM.

[Artgathan]

Trauglodyte, on 17 January 2014 - 02:07 PM, said:

It amazes me that people are still pushing for this. Do you even know why they changed the flight pattern and spread of SRMs? It is because {Surat} and bads were running around face hugging and demolition derby piloting so that all of their missiles hit one spot. Centurion pilots were going nuts just running smack dab into mechs to get them to stop so that they could pull the trigger and laugh at how awesome they were. SRMs need the spread so that it prevents the bads from screwin gup the game for the rest of us. I'm just sad that the missiles no longer attempt to converge on your reticle like they used to do.

Actually the current system promotes face-hugging more. I can actually get 80-90% of my SRMs onto one panel if I'm touching the enemy mech when I fire them off. At least in the old system I could fire off my SRMs from certain distances to get increases in accuracy.

[Vidarok]

I agree with the OP, I myself am getting tired of this passive snorefest we call the current meta.

Pulse lasers are not worth it and SRMs are unreliable. FIX IT, FIX IT, FIX IT!

Also, PPC jumping is the ultimate act of showing you have no skill.

[Mekwarrior]

I like the idea of increasing the rate of fire of pulse lasers significantly (not just a tiny bit). Because then you could have less pulse lasers and use the space/tonnage for extra heat sinks. And the increased rate of fire would make them more different from standard lasers.

[Mekwarrior]

So many games your team just won't attack, or wont even support an attack that is going well because they only want to sit behind something and LRM or snipe It's making the game a lot less fun than it could be. Unless it's on a pokey map like terra therma, then you get traffic jams

Because long range weapons are overpowered compared with short range.

I want it to be more like tank battles, with a lot more medium and short range maneuvering.

Edited by Mekwarrior, 19 January 2014 - 06:44 AM.

[Corvus Antaka]

I think the goal should to decrease the power of some of the long range weapons, not increase the TTK with brawlers, thus everything dies even faster.

[Khobai]

Quote

I think the goal should to decrease the power of some of the long range weapons, not increase the TTK with brawlers, thus everything dies even faster.

This. Increasing TTK even more needs to be avoided. Plus an SRM buff directly buffs Highlanders because they have enough tonnage to use SRMs in addition to their PPC/AC loadouts.

[ArchSight]

It's not how weak a weapon is but how tactically viable the weapon is. Close range weapons are like bringing a knife to a gun fight in all mechwarrior games including TT. You get shot before you get within knife range. Thats not good if you want to live a long life. Thats why long range weapons appeal to players more than close range weapons. It's about minimizing the amount of damage you take while maximizing the amount of damage the other mech takes. How thats possible is by using cover to minimize the amount of damage your mech is exposed to while manuevering to a position that takes away your oppenents cover. (Which medium mechs are great at )

The Use of obsticals to take cover behind is dependent on map design. Maps that are wide open with very little cover to hide behind let long range weapons become tacticaly more useful because they can make use of that cover while shooting across the map without moving out of it. The Close range weapons are best on maps that are cluttered with many areas that a player can hide and travel through to get within range. There's a problem though, many long range weapons can be used at close range and another problem where player's don't know what kind of map there going to be dropped into before they pick their mech. Close range mechs would be seen more often if player's knew that they were going to be dropped into a close range map.

Also, close range mech loadouts would see more use on long range maps if the player's could have multiple ninja smoke grenades to throw to give themselves cover to hide from radar detection and accurate shots.

Edited by ArchSight, 19 January 2014 - 05:01 PM.

[Abivard]

This thread is a case of seeing the trees and ignoring the forest.

[Mekwarrior]

I don't mind if short range weapons are increased or long range weapons are reduced in power, either way.

At the moment it's kind of like a ww1 trench style of gameplay but if that's what everyone likes.

I just think it gets slightly boring and could be more fun with a more tank battle like gameplay style.
Tanks (similar to mechs) were supposed to be made to bring mobility and maneuver back from static type warfare.

[Abivard]

Mekwarrior, on 19 January 2014 - 10:49 PM, said:

I don't mind if short range weapons are increased or long range weapons are reduced in power, either way.

At the moment it's kind of like a ww1 trench style of gameplay but if that's what everyone likes.

I just think it gets slightly boring and could be more fun with a more tank battle like gameplay style.
Tanks (similar to mechs) were supposed to be made to bring mobility and maneuver back from static type warfare.

Actually they were not MADE for that.

They were made for head on assault, to aid infantry in piercing a fortified line. They were assigned piecemeal and used in ones and twos. if they could go more than 4 miles without breaking down everyone was ecstatic with joy.

Also, it was quickly acknowledged that short range weapons were inferior to long range.

[lsp]

Increasing the power of all weapons, instead of nerfing everything, would improve gameplay. They should have just stuck to the lore, and not deviated from it. Weapons should be situational, like in real life. It would be a much better game if they would have just stuck to the way mechwarrior was supposed to be, instead of tweaking everything in the name of "balance". Double heat sinks that don't work"balance" ghost heat that shouldn't exist "balance" charge time on GR "balance" lame.

[Mekwarrior]

Abivard, on 20 January 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

Actually they were not MADE for that.

They were made for head on assault, to aid infantry in piercing a fortified line. They were assigned piecemeal and used in ones and twos. if they could go more than 4 miles without breaking down everyone was ecstatic with joy.

Also, it was quickly acknowledged that short range weapons were inferior to long range.

Ok maybe you haven't heard of Blitzkrieg yet. Yes I also suggested aerotech fighter but no one wanted those either.

Also I'm not too sure if a constant breaking down feature would be popular in Mechwarrior.

There are no infantry in Mechwarrior so we can't have that style of gameplay.

My point is, in many games these days players just go to the same old spot every game and stand still for most of the game while firing lrms and sniping only and it get's a bit boring. Unless it is a pokey map where you can't really have a good battle because you keep bumping into things and other players.

I wanted a style of gameplay where it is still a challenge to get close but when you do close range and medium range mechs are significantly more powerful than long range.

Edited by Mekwarrior, 21 January 2014 - 12:53 AM.

[Noesis]

Agree with the OP, short game needs some love.

Reserving right to see what happens after tonnage restrictions are put in.

At present though the dominating meta of pinpoint, FLD, ranged, ballistics is simply too effective that it certainly restricts alternative play styles and makes the game predictably dull to a certain extent.

[Joseph Mallan]

Tombstoner, on 17 January 2014 - 12:54 PM, said:

Nice analogy.... since heavy cavalry where basically eliminated via longbow. The long range meta has ruled ever since.
lets see how to balance out real combat for inspiration into MWO issues.

Short range allows inherently inaccurate weapons a chance to function.Not viable in MWO since all DF weapons have the same accuracy. yes even machine guns..... what your thinking of is actually a lack of precision. Basically a short range weapon needs to do a high amount of damage or its kinda worthless or its damage to heat ratio be favorable.

In MWO its a waist of hard points for short range weapons. hard points need to be for long range weapons since the function as well as short range weapons..... why take a srm6 vs a lrm 10. well you save 2 tones but at the experience of 1000m meter range for a 270 max with no minimum. your still subject to ecm. you can direct fire both types. for what your giving up in range id down grade from srm6 to lrm 5 saveing a tone each for armor and maximizing damage to my targets ct.

Short range weapons need a buff to offset the excessive range bonus some weapons got during the TT to PC conversion. shorts got shafted for no good reason.

A very myopic view.

[Asmosis]

short range weapons are already pretty brutal, *if* you can get to close range (excluding srms ofc).

Lrms are relatively easy to counter.
er ppcs (on their own) generate too much heat to be able to stop a rushing heavy mech.

The only real long range stopper (surprise surprise) is high pinpoint alphas using combined ac/ppcs to get around the heat penalties

[kapusta11]

SRMs are pretty strong on paper already the problem is that they are unreliable, fixing them would actually buff medium mechs as they are perfect (fast enough) in closing distances. Have no idea why it's not the top priority.

[Mekwarrior]

Yes if they could improve SRMs and pulse lasers that would be good.

[Tombstoner]

Joseph Mallan, on 21 January 2014 - 04:47 AM, said:

A very myopic view.

I agree... i wish srm's did full damage and other short range weapons where really competitive in a hard point world and not something you turn to for spending extra tonnage: mg's being the exception due to the crit system. but when you remove the hard point system sure you'll see 40 small laser or 15 medium laser builds. but 4 medium lasers are not really = to one ac-20.

Long to medium range is how its played. if the other team gets in close you did something wrong.

[Joseph Mallan]

Tombstoner, on 21 January 2014 - 05:57 AM, said:

I agree... i wish srm's did full damage and other short range weapons where really competitive in a hard point world and not something you turn to for spending extra tonnage: mg's being the exception due to the crit system. but when you remove the hard point system sure you'll see 40 small laser or 15 medium laser builds. but 4 medium lasers are not really = to one ac-20.

Long to medium range is how its played. if the other team gets in close you did something wrong.

My 1st 10 years of the TT game was played that way. Then I switched gears. I remember being a part of these kinds of discussions 11 years ago on the HeavyMetalPro forums. Somethings never go out of style.