Jump to content

Mwo Is The Most Offensive Game Out There.


79 replies to this topic

#41 Bishop Steiner

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 47,187 posts
  • Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:08 AM

View PostRyokens leap, on 23 January 2014 - 06:05 PM, said:

Maybe it's time to double armour values again...

dear god no.

the high alpha is a problem, but lets not continue PGIs trend of band aid fixes, but address the underlying issues such as near unlimited customization which leads to boating (easily fixable with sized hardpoints or a crit limiting system (such as the HBK has 12 ballistic crits......split them how you like, while the K2 has 2 ballistic crits, period),

convergence (hence the pinpoint damage, leading to high alphas..... I miss the days in CB where swift target changes actually caused my ppcs to cross harmlessly ahead or behind the enemy mech..... don't tell me cryengine can't handle convergence, because it DID)

and since jump shake caused so much nausea apparently, it had to be nerfed (some cases likely true, lets be honest most of the complaints were metarapists wanting their ezmode back) how about a weapon aiming de-sync (aka the reticle shake) lasts a full second (getting less sever as the timer counts down) for a full second after thrust is cut.

but increasing armor itself, or the ever popular cry to make all weapons DoT simply dumbs the game down further and makes it PapercutWarrior Online. People complain about the financial grind, dear god, I would love to see the eventually QQ from each mech battle lasting 20 minutes (on a 15 minute timer). Not to mention it would pretty much totally devalue the advantage of position, ambush, etc.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 24 January 2014 - 06:08 AM.


#42 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:14 AM

View PostKhobai, on 23 January 2014 - 09:17 PM, said:


Mines shouldnt get triggered by friendly mechs anyway. If you have a friendly IFF signal the mines shouldnt detonate when you go near them. Although I suppose you could take collateral damage if they explode next to an enemy and you happen to be nearby.

That depends on if you are using vibro mines or not Kho!

#43 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:20 AM

View PostRyoken, on 24 January 2014 - 05:46 AM, said:

As PPCs are energy weapons that to my statement are still used in competitive builds your post makes no sense. Also medium lasers are used on many competitive light mech builds because Autocannons and PPCs are to heavy.

FYI the weapons rarely seen in competitive builds and therefore beeing suspicious to underperform are LRM and SRM.

And finally: How would buffing of energy weapons not reduce the allready short time of killing a mech as the OP stated? We are looking for a way to make mechs last longer if I understood the OP correctly!


You have to admit that currently dual or tripple AC5/UAC5 do get out of hand. Also dual AC20 builds, the equivalent to the extinct PPC boats, still run around. And a dual AC10 build still is pretty fine. Thanx to their high DPS and low heat build up Autocannons push your damage per battle through the roof.

Therefore a way must be found to tone down the Autocannons. And when talking about making Autocannons into a burst firing weapon I have timespans of 0.2 to 1.0 seconds in mind! So as long or shorter than firing a laser endures.

The burst mechanism could help to avoid those pinpoint oneshot kills the dual AC20 builds do cause.

On the dual/tripple (U)AC5 builds the short bursts could reduce the sniping as well as jumpsniping capability.

Also the DPS should be looked at to bring ACs back in line with the other weapons.

I don't see it as getting out of hand. Power players have a place in the gaming environment. I use a Jager40, but none of the other "OP" builds. They don't work the way I want to play the game. It is a personal preference. I have not had a uneven result against he Supposed OP Meta to date. Or to say it more correctly, I have not had enough of a lopsided experience to make me upset.

#44 Mechteric

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 7,308 posts
  • LocationRTP, NC

Posted 24 January 2014 - 06:56 AM

I don't think we need all this different armor types, but everything else you mentioned would be good. Especially passive radar, this would really help short range brawlers sneak up on those long range mechs!

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 24 January 2014 - 06:56 AM.


#45 TygerLily

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 2,150 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:01 AM

View PostVillz, on 23 January 2014 - 03:00 PM, said:

Best post I've read on the forums in a LONGGGG time.

Too bad most people that play this game are terrible and don't understand anything other than "<<INSERT WEAPON THAT KILLS ME MOST HERE>> is OP, nerf plx.

Those changes would all be great i liked my idea of an IR smoke launcher module 2.

If onl the could get hit detection / hsr / netcode working ontop of all this.

The game might even be working correctly @ that point .... :ph34r:


Wh...what? Villz, you are such a nice guy! What the hell happens when you launch your client??

- Smoke screen would be great.
- Maybe give Ferro a buff vs energy weapons
- Trees as concealment, this would be awesome. Doesn't prevent damage and you can get shot through them but obscures you from being targeted (like smoke).

#46 Almond Brown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 5,851 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:02 AM

View PostRyokens leap, on 23 January 2014 - 06:05 PM, said:

Maybe it's time to double armour values again...


Maybe it's time for more players to look up the term "cover". It "quintuples" your armor value. :ph34r:

Edited by Almond Brown, 24 January 2014 - 07:03 AM.


#47 kapusta11

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 3,854 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:04 AM

If one weapon is better than the other where is the evidence that it's the former that is OP and not the latter being underpowered?

Btw, I don't mind of suggested by OP content being added but with current implementation of modules, ferro fibrous armor and other useless stuff I don't believe that PGI can make it right.

#48 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:04 AM

View PostRyokens leap, on 23 January 2014 - 06:05 PM, said:

Maybe it's time to double armour values again...

Posted Image

#49 Almond Brown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 5,851 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:09 AM

View Post3rdworld, on 23 January 2014 - 08:58 PM, said:

Modular Armor would be a great help as well.

1 ton & 1 crit for 20 extra points of armor on a location. Could really help mechs with hitbox drawbacks correct it by up armoring the location.


2 tons and 3 crits and done. Otherwise you end up with Atlases with 1000 point of armor...easy. Who needs very many weapons when you're bleeding indestructible. :ph34r:

#50 Almond Brown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 5,851 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:15 AM

View PostRyoken, on 24 January 2014 - 05:07 AM, said:

Hm and what is anyone who implies that all the competitive teams with their setups and builds are blind and stupid?


Narrow minded? :ph34r:

#51 Corbon Zackery

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,363 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:43 AM

Hardened Armor:
Development of Hardened Armor began in 3045 with the Federated Commonwealth.[1] Though prototype armors entered service in 3047,[1] the multiple drawbacks of the armor prevented widespread adoption. The Clan Invasion increased pressure on manufacturers to create viable Hardened Armor but despite their best efforts creating armor that provides increased protection without compromising performance remains impossible. The final drawback to Hardened Armor is its cost: 15,000 C-Bills per ton.[3] This has restricted its use to prototype vehicles and 'Mechs


Originally an Experimental Technology, the Laser Reflective Armor was first created by the Lyran Alliance in 3058, and used in 3061 by Clan Jade Falcon.[1] Also known as Glazed or Reflec armor, the first batch of Laser Reflective Armor was created by accident on a Ferro-Fibrous armor production line. Laser Reflective Armor dissipates energy weapon attacks 50% more efficiently than other armor types, reducing the amount of damage taken by the 'Mech mounting it. Despite the name, Laser Reflective Armor is effective against all energy weapons, not just lasers. PPCs, Flamers, and Plasma Rifles and Cannons are all less effective against it. The armor's status as Experimental item end at close of the Jihad era. It would enter regular production and become standard Inner Sphere Technology in 3080.

Stealth Armor:
The finest achievement in stealth systems developed by the original Star League, the Null Signature System was capable of shielding a BattleMech from electronic detection. Unfortunately like many pieces of advanced technology, the system and the 'Mechs that carried it became LosTech during the maelstrom of the early Succession Wars. All Successor States attempted to recover and rediscover the technology, but the Capellan Confederation is the closest to recreating the system.

Discovering detailed information on the system in the archives of the reactivated Star League era Shengli Arms factory, while not yet able to produce a bolt for bolt, circuit for circuit replication, with typical Capellan ingenuity House Liao developed a stop-gap solution suitable for mass-production. Integrating the heat baffles and required components directly into specially designed armor plating, when linked with a Guardian ECM Suite Stealth Armor replicates the benefits (and disadvantages) of the Null Signature System. [2] Though bulkier than the Null Signature System that inspired it, Stealth Armor is still less bulky than Ferro-Fibrous Armor.[3]

By 3071, schematics for the armor had been stolen by the Federated Suns. [4] By 3075, the armor was also being manufactured by the Lyran Alliance, and possibly other powers as well. [5]

The Guardian ECM Suite mounted on the unit functions normally regardless of the Stealth Armor's activation status

In 3051,[1] the Federated Commonwealth started development of the Blue Shield Particle Field Damper, a defensive system that would reduce damage from PPCs. The New Avalon Institute of Science produced its prototype in 3053. While the field damper did shield the equipped unit from PPC fire, it was also notoriously unreliable in ground units. After roughly a minute of operation, the dust and other miscellaneous debris it sucked in began to adversely affect the operation of the damper, eventually resulting in shutdown of the system.[2] To delay this problem, MechWarriors are known to shut down the Blue Shield if there are no enemy units wielding PPCs, reactivating it if a PPC-equipped foe arrives.

None of these systems are out of experimental production phases. Blue Shield maybe since it is a 3051 item.

Edited by Corbon Zackery, 24 January 2014 - 07:46 AM.


#52 Ryoken

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Determined
  • The Determined
  • 744 posts
  • LocationEuropa, Terra

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:50 AM

View PostJoseph Mallan, on 24 January 2014 - 06:20 AM, said:

I don't see it as getting out of hand. Power players have a place in the gaming environment. I use a Jager40, but none of the other "OP" builds. They don't work the way I want to play the game. It is a personal preference. I have not had a uneven result against he Supposed OP Meta to date. Or to say it more correctly, I have not had enough of a lopsided experience to make me upset.

Sure you do not see it getting out of hand when you play a Jager40.
I also feel fine in my dual UAC5 + dual PPC HGN-733C.
I also like my dual AC10 Catapult and I am looking forward to my mulit AC5/2 or single AC20 Shadow Hawk!
And when the ballistics stay as they are I will also get myself a Riflebrand and a Jager40. PS: I'll also get a Cataphract 3D!

So do you see a pattern there? :ph34r: To quote Sean Lang: "If it can be abused, it will be abused!". And I agree, overpowered weapons and chassis will always rise in number while underpowered weapons and chassis will fade away. We got a selection pressure and on goes the evolution. The developers job is to avoid the resulting monocultures by adjusting weapons and chassis to be as equal in combat effectivity as possible. Ideally by having to apply ever smaller adjustments as time goes by.

Edited by Ryoken, 24 January 2014 - 07:53 AM.


#53 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 24 January 2014 - 07:56 AM

View PostRyoken, on 24 January 2014 - 07:50 AM, said:

Sure you do not see it getting out of hand when you play a Jager40.
I also feel fine in my dual UAC5 + dual PPC HGN-733C.
I also like my dual AC10 Catapult and I am looking forward to my mulit AC5/2 or single AC20 Shadow Hawk!
And when the ballistics stay as they are I will also get myself a Riflebrand and a Jager40.

So do you see a pattern there? :ph34r: To quote Sean Land: "If it can be abused, it will be abused!". And I agree, overpowered weapons and chassis will always rise in number while underpowered weapons and chassis will fade away. The developers job is to avoid the resulting monocultures by adjusting weapons and chassis to be as equal in combat effectivity as possible. Ideally by having to apply ever smaller adjustments as time goes by.

I haven't player the Jager40 in a month? I have been grinding other rides. As Joe I don't own a single OP Meta build and I play this alt the most! There will always be something that someone thinks is OP. Once we are reduced to only Small lasers the Jenner and the Swayback will be OP!

#54 Trauglodyte

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,373 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:26 AM

We need Thunderbolt and SWARM LRMs, imo, along with Smoke (consumable with 5 charges).

#55 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:28 AM

View PostTrauglodyte, on 24 January 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

We need Thunderbolt and SWARM LRMs, imo, along with Smoke (consumable with 5 charges).

Yeah cause 20-40 damage to one location is going over so swimmingly right now at half the range! :ph34r:

#56 Trauglodyte

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,373 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:32 AM

View PostJoseph Mallan, on 24 January 2014 - 08:28 AM, said:

Yeah cause 20-40 damage to one location is going over so swimmingly right now at half the range! :ph34r:


Wait! I meant the Thunder LRM instead of the Thunderbolt. What is with all of the Thunder stuff in Battletech? Jeez!

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Thunder_LRM

Edited by Trauglodyte, 24 January 2014 - 08:34 AM.


#57 wanderer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 11,152 posts
  • LocationStomping around in a giant robot, of course.

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:44 AM

View PostMoonUnitBeta, on 23 January 2014 - 02:29 PM, said:

And yet there isn’t much that players can do to defend themselves.

Save for ECM and Seismic Sensor, and sheer speed in some cases, there isn’t much in MWO that you can do to really defend yourself! Controlling the battlefield? I’d like there to be more ways we can curb FOTM (currently ballistics), and remove a majority of the reliance on PGI to fix the weapons balance 6 or so months later…

Hardened / Reactive / Reflective / Stealth Armor / Blue Shield(tx Khobai) – These are a given and need to be put in, the exception being stealth armor, maybe. All of these equipable upgrades help pilots defend and protect themselves against popular weapons. Someone corrected me about reactive armor (damn you MW4 for deceiving me!), defences against ballistics seem a little scarce unless someone can inform me. Various armor types will help us protect against the incredibly slow weapon balancing. These types of armor advancements give players the tools they need to react against those imperfections. Currently there's nothing that we can do except to wait and depend on PGI to fix things for us. If we had what we needed to equip our mechs with, we can balance the scales on our own. Please do not talk to me about the “time-line” if these armor types aren’t relevant. The timeline doesn’t exist.




At this point, all these armor types will do is add even more variables to an equation that hasn't been solved to begin with. Mind you, I'd have no problems with hardened going in now, along with some of the long-term "prototype" weaponry like the binary laser...but we're still having balance issues with what's already IN the game.

Shouldn't we try to balance those first before figuring out where to jam in more?

#58 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:45 AM

View PostTrauglodyte, on 24 January 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:


Wait! I meant the Thunder LRM instead of the Thunderbolt. What is with all of the Thunder stuff in Battletech? Jeez!

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Thunder_LRM

That is a big difference! :ph34r:

#59 Suko

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,226 posts
  • LocationPacific Northwest

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:49 AM

I have to admit that the armor idea is an interesting one I hadn't considered yet.

By introducing this you allow players to react to the FotM mechs. As you noted, ballistics are everywhere right now. Since this is the current "meta", more people would start taking anti-ballistic armor (let's just pretend it's the reactive armor) over standard armor. This should eventually lead to more people taking energy and PPC to cut through the reactive armor, leading to a change in the meta.

I want this. It'll add more variety to the matches (which is always a good thing) and make it that much more difficult for the meta to stagnate as it has over the last few months.

#60 Trauglodyte

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,373 posts

Posted 24 January 2014 - 08:50 AM

View PostJoseph Mallan, on 24 January 2014 - 08:45 AM, said:

That is a big difference! :ph34r:


Hey! I'm an old man too so my memory isn't what it used to be. I'm still immature but that doesn't mean I remember everything. :huh:

Btw, Hardened Armor wouldn't really provide us with any real benefit. You get half of the armor per ton but it absorbs twice as much damage. That means that you end up with the same amount of armor that we have right now so, if you think about it, we already have it. The benefit to HA was that it reduced the chance of critical hits. That would have an interesting impact on the game except for the fact that damage is so heavy that criticals don't really matter. Why do I care if I lose a heat sink in a torso when the next alpha is going to rip it off anyway?

Edited by Trauglodyte, 24 January 2014 - 08:54 AM.






15 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 15 guests, 0 anonymous users