1026 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Dracol, on 13 February 2014 - 08:50 PM, said:

In regards to how it performs currently, I would hazard a guess it is because of programming concerns.

I'll admit any improvement for realism will require more effort and resources, as simple LOS is all that's requested. The problem is that what we effectively have at the moment is what amounts to "space magic" and makes one facepalm to "why is my AMS activating while behind some obvious obstruction?".

As it is, LOS seems to work most of the time (barring a mech is behind some sort of see-thru obstruction like the middle area "walls" of Tourmaline).

Edited by Deathlike, 14 February 2014 - 12:24 AM.

[Deathlike]

MustrumRidcully, on 14 February 2014 - 12:18 AM, said:

If this is actually true and not merely a result of different jump jet mechanics back then, if I had to guess, this is why: You can add up to 30 tons of counter-armour, weaponry, ammo and heat sinks to deal with a Cataphract, by the virtue of picking a heavier, non-poptart-capable mech.
The Highlander leaves a much smaller margin (10 tons) and that's not enough to counter the tactical advantages of poptarting.

Cataphracts was the primary mech that most benefited from the JJ changes from approximately one year ago. There were other JJ capable mechs at the time, but there were few relevant ones in the early going. The Highlanders only exacerbated that issue on its own release (no other JJ Assaults or heavier mechs at the time), so you'd have to color that reality. IIRC, Spiders, Jenners, Trebuchets, Catapults were the only other JJ capable mechs at the time, which were soon to be flooded with a fair number more (Blackjacks, Quickdraws, and Victors to name some of the notables, Quickdraw being the oddball).

So, take it for what that's worth.

[Pat Kell]

Kotare, you are correct, if the nerf jj's you guys will simply find another superior build to dominate the game but what you are failing to realize is that it won't be so complete. JJ's rule the battlefield because it allows you to dictate when the engagement happens and for how long it happens. You can do this by hill humping as well but it isn't nearly as effective. Not to mention when you overheat while JJ'ing, you shut down and fall into cover. When you over heat when hill humping, most likely you are going to shut down right in front of the enemy.

I could care less if they nerf it or not, it won't affect how I play at all because I never use them so please don't think this is me calling for the nerf, I just think it's going to be funny when people (maybe not the ggclose douche bags...which by the way, you are douches for saying ggclose at the start of every match....that speaks volumes about the type of people you are....there is nobility in being humble with your skills and you have none...and yes I realize you don't care what I think so don't bother responding as such) who rely on JJ's have to completely adapt to a whole new play style. Will be funny for a couple of weeks....that is if they do anything to it at all.

Edited by Pat Kell, 14 February 2014 - 02:22 AM.

[GrogX]

Pat Kell, on 14 February 2014 - 02:14 AM, said:

Kotare, you are correct, if the nerf jj's you guys will simply find another superior build to dominate the game but what you are failing to realize is that it won't be so complete. JJ's rule the battlefield because it allows you to dictate when the engagement happens and for how long it happens. You can do this by hill humping as well but it isn't nearly as effective. Not to mention when you overheat while JJ'ing, you shut down and fall into cover. When you over heat when hill humping, most likely you are going to shut down right in front of the enemy.

I could care less if they nerf it or not, it won't affect how I play at all because I never use them so please don't think this is me calling for the nerf, I just think it's going to be funny when people (maybe not the ggclose douche bags...which by the way, you are douches for saying ggclose at the start of every match....that speaks volumes about the type of people you are....there is nobility in being humble with your skills and you have none...and yes I realize you don't care what I think so don't bother responding as such) who rely on JJ's have to completely adapt to a whole new play style. Will be funny for a couple of weeks....that is if they do anything to it at all.

Strange. I don't remember ever noticing most ggclose guys before pop tarting. If they can adapt and brawl, good for them. Maybe they'll make a good second place team. Some of them are good dudes, delta spectra, wispsy(godlike), etc. The rest of you can all burn in a flaming dung pile. glenclose

[MERC Mournblade]

Grogyoufong, on 14 February 2014 - 02:26 AM, said:

Strange. I don't remember ever noticing most ggclose guys before pop tarting. If they can adapt and brawl, good for them. Maybe they'll make a good second place team. Some of them are good dudes, delta spectra, wispsy(godlike), etc. The rest of you can all burn in a flaming dung pile. glenclose

I remember some of them. Villz, Kotare and probably others that are in their group. Granted I have to log on at an obscure hour of the day to get matched with them (as well as choose skirmish game mode). They win when they poptart but they suck in other mechs when I've matched with them. This one trick pony thing seems to be the norm for dedicated poptarts. They call themselves 'lords' yet fold like a deck of cards when poised against kings and emperors that actually know how to play the game.

[Artgathan]

Koniving, on 13 February 2014 - 08:56 PM, said:

With the 100 point on all mechs system, Said Jenner actually gets 10 points less health than its current max is now. Said Atlas gets 94 points more health. What exactly are you complaining about? Seems the fact is polar opposite of your complaint. I believe you misunderstood it. It's stock + 100. For many mechs this significantly lowers their health. And for some it raises their health.

Typically it raises the health of the weak, under performing mechs whose sole redeeming value was high armor. And for the most part it hurts the mechs that have an immense amount of firepower potential but from lore have paper thin armor.
--------
Interestingly enough, a random example is the 30 ton mechs Spider and Urbanmech. Right now the Spider outclasses the Urban mech in every aspect, especially when you consider speed, armor, etc.

Urbanmech however has quite a bit more armor stock to make up for the fact that PGI would limit it to 62 kph with speed tweak. But what good is that if the Spider can equip the same armor?

After the stock + 100 concept, the Spider (stock 112+100) only gains 2 points of extra armor (212) versus the current max (210) for them.
The Urbanmech, however, makes up for its speed with 6 tons of armor (at 32 points per ton is 192). If using the current system it's dead on arrival. The proposed system, 192 + 100 = 292. Armor makes up for lack of speed.

Time to kill for every mech is equally raised versus stock. There's no discrepancies. No oddities. It's like taking your finger to all of the sliders on your equalizer and raising them all at once. It's equally raised.

It doesn't matter what the flat value is applied to; it will still homogenize mechs that have "similar" armor coverage. Consider the JR7-F and CN9-AL. Both are "heavily" armoured stock mech. Stock, they have 224 and 338 armor respectively. This means that the JR7-F has 66% of the CN9-AL's armor. Now increase their armor by 100 points.

The JR7-F has 324 armor and the CN9-AL has 438. The JR7-F now has 73% of the CN9-AL's armor.

Yes, you've increase TTK by a flat margin. But this unfairly buffs lightly armored chassis compared to heavily armored ones. Consider that if you assume a flat rate of 33DPS to each of these mechs (and you need to destroy just the armor to kill them), it will take 6.78 seconds to kill the stock JR7-F and 10.24 seconds to kill the stock CN9-AL.

After the buff it takes 9.78 seconds to kill the Jenner and 13.24 seconds to kill the CN9-AL. You've buffed the Jenner by 144%, but the Centurion only gets a 129% buff.

This is why I suggested making the armor cap for each mech some percentage of their stock value. That way everyone has the same opportunity for improvement.

[kaffeangst]

@MERC Mournblade

Do me a favor and go back through the MWO solo-drop tournaments of the past with a roster of the House of Lords. When you recognize the names of winners and top-finishers (in all classes), come back and say something else. One-trick pony? We can brawl just as well (if not better than) we "pop-tart", but please, keep your biased opinion of our playing ability. See how that works out for you ; )

ATLAS AS7-D-DC 423 317 106 2.99 786 109 7.21 251,211 452,336 1 day 18:33:52

Yup, can't brawl... only pop-tart in my Atlases and other "brawler" mechs.


LORD KAFFEANGST
ggclose™
Rank #1 1v12

[Mcgral18]

Artgathan, on 14 February 2014 - 05:41 AM, said:

It doesn't matter what the flat value is applied to; it will still homogenize mechs that have "similar" armor coverage. Consider the JR7-F and CN9-AL. Both are "heavily" armoured stock mech. Stock, they have 224 and 338 armor respectively. This means that the JR7-F has 66% of the CN9-AL's armor. Now increase their armor by 100 points.

The JR7-F has 324 armor and the CN9-AL has 438. The JR7-F now has 73% of the CN9-AL's armor.

Yes, you've increase TTK by a flat margin. But this unfairly buffs lightly armored chassis compared to heavily armored ones. Consider that if you assume a flat rate of 33DPS to each of these mechs (and you need to destroy just the armor to kill them), it will take 6.78 seconds to kill the stock JR7-F and 10.24 seconds to kill the stock CN9-AL.

After the buff it takes 9.78 seconds to kill the Jenner and 13.24 seconds to kill the CN9-AL. You've buffed the Jenner by 144%, but the Centurion only gets a 129% buff.

This is why I suggested making the armor cap for each mech some percentage of their stock value. That way everyone has the same opportunity for improvement.

No, that just means there will be an even bigger gap between the chassis. Keep the flat value.

[Artgathan]

Mcgral18, on 14 February 2014 - 07:18 AM, said:

No, that just means there will be an even bigger gap between the chassis. Keep the flat value.

But what is the logical reason for this? With a flat buff the Locust-3S will more than double its armor, but the Jenner-F only gets a 50% buff, and an Atlas only gets a 16% buff? Why should one mech class benefit disproportionately from this?

[Mcgral18]

Artgathan, on 14 February 2014 - 07:34 AM, said:

But what is the logical reason for this? With a flat buff the Locust-3S will more than double its armor, but the Jenner-F only gets a 50% buff, and an Atlas only gets a 16% buff? Why should one mech class benefit disproportionately from this?

So those more armoured mechs are not completely useless. Armour should be a factor when selecting a mech, not just hard points and JJs. A percentage value just doesn't do enough for the small mechs, but can be too much for bigger mechs.

[Artgathan]

Mcgral18, on 14 February 2014 - 07:48 AM, said:

So those more armoured mechs are not completely useless. Armour should be a factor when selecting a mech, not just hard points and JJs. A percentage value just doesn't do enough for the small mechs, but can be too much for bigger mechs.

So then why not just restrict people to stock armor?

[Deathlike]

Artgathan, on 14 February 2014 - 07:53 AM, said:

So then why not just restrict people to stock armor?

I'm sure that'll make Jagermechs "great".

[Mcgral18]

Artgathan, on 14 February 2014 - 07:53 AM, said:

So then why not just restrict people to stock armor?

Because weapons do 3 times plus TT damage, hence the whole doubled armor, which was not nearly enough for some weapons. And too much for others.

[Roland]

Khan Ignotus Kotare, on 14 February 2014 - 08:33 AM, said:

It is a rather common expectation / "respectable" characteristic from many non-factor terribads that all skilled players are to be "humble."

Well, I think the notion of sportsmanship isn't really some idea that is only held by bad players.

I mean, it goes beyond video games. Most folks generally learn about being a good sport when they are children.

Likewise, things like modesty, at least in the real world, are generally considered to be admirable qualities for people to have, which makes them better human beings.

[Artgathan]

Mcgral18, on 14 February 2014 - 08:42 AM, said:

Because weapons do 3 times plus TT damage, hence the whole doubled armor, which was not nearly enough for some weapons. And too much for others.

You do realize that Koniving's suggestion would reduce the amount of armor present on lots of mechs, right? For instance, the Trebuchet-3C, Quickdraw, Shadow Hawk, Victor, Jenners D/K and Jagermech would have max armor values lower than their current max. A healthy portion of the mechs would experience no change in their max armor. The only mechs really affected by this change are those that:

1. Already run max armor and could now run max + 100 armor or
2. Light mechs

You could argue that the change helps nerf some of the "OP" builds (Jagers and Victors), but it also buffs others (JR7-F, Highlanders). At the same time, it kicks already bad mechs in the teeth (JR7-D/K, Quickdraws, Trebuchets).

Also, why shouldn't mechs be able to carry their relative weight disparity? If a CN9-AL is "supposed" to carry 50% more armor than a JR7-F (according to stock), why should that disparity be reduced to 31% (using the proposed +100 system)? If I want to keep it at 50% higher, I still need to spend tonnage to achieve that. It's not magical "free" armor getting strapped to my mech - I presumably still have to pay for it.

What I'm saying is that if the JR7-F is getting +100, the CN9-AL should get +148, and the Locust-3M should get +46. This gives the "flavour" of having lightly armored vs. heavily armored mechs, while keeping their relative differences intact.

[Mcgral18]

Artgathan, on 14 February 2014 - 09:10 AM, said:

You do realize that Koniving's suggestion would reduce the amount of armor present on lots of mechs, right? For instance, the Trebuchet-3C, Quickdraw, Shadow Hawk, Victor, Jenners D/K and Jagermech would have max armor values lower than their current max. A healthy portion of the mechs would experience no change in their max armor. The only mechs really affected by this change are those that:

1. Already run max armor and could now run max + 100 armor or
2. Light mechs

You could argue that the change helps nerf some of the "OP" builds (Jagers and Victors), but it also buffs others (JR7-F, Highlanders). At the same time, it kicks already bad mechs in the teeth (JR7-D/K, Quickdraws, Trebuchets).

Also, why shouldn't mechs be able to carry their relative weight disparity? If a CN9-AL is "supposed" to carry 50% more armor than a JR7-F (according to stock), why should that disparity be reduced to 31% (using the proposed +100 system)? If I want to keep it at 50% higher, I still need to spend tonnage to achieve that. It's not magical "free" armor getting strapped to my mech - I presumably still have to pay for it.

What I'm saying is that if the JR7-F is getting +100, the CN9-AL should get +148, and the Locust-3M should get +46. This gives the "flavour" of having lightly armored vs. heavily armored mechs, while keeping their relative differences intact.

PGIs never going to try any of it, so there isn't much point to argue.

[kbilly]

HoL guys,

If you are honestly good but also boast and claim to be the best.... what's the purpose? I mean, do you honestly think that does anything for you? Doesn't that ultimatly mean all you have is yourself to talk to at the end of the day because no one else likes an insecure bully epeener?

I mean, I'm sure you have your other circlejerk friends to hang with, but as for everyone else? If you have no respect in the community, at the end of the day no ones going to buy you a beer and slap you on the back while saying "hey great games mate." You still think you've "won" anything if you have no respect? Your legacy is what carries you to fame House of Lords. And guess what? You have no legacy. You may win or place high in tourneys, but at the end of the day, no one cares about you.

Perhaps that's why some of you try so hard. It's kind of sad really.

(in mocking salute to the insecure epeeners)
FJORD KBILLY
glenclose

[MechB Kotare]

Considering this thread is still alive, and Lord Kotare finds it worth paying attention to...

I had a thought that occured in my mind long time ago. Probably already mentioned, suggested or begged for in this thread...

I really wanted to read all comments, but after getting to page 2, i got little bored....

Anyway. The thought. Here it comes.

.
.
.

Why not implementing JJs the way they were in Mw4? You would probably have an ability to upgrade your chassis with JJ the way you can equip Artemis IV for example. While still restricted to only some Chassis/variants, the JJ 'upgrade' would have predefined tonnage/slots count.

Means you wouldnt be able to mount 1 JJ?
No need to nerf anything.

Dont get me wrong, i dont give a f*** about the HGN.
Its slow.
Its ugly.
(Then again same as almost every IS mech excluding Atlas, Cataphract and Victor.)

From a Inouye's comment from a different thread...

Quote

[color=cyan]I'll chime in here since the write up was well thought out and presented. (Not that other posts haven't been the same, but I'm being prodded by other internal influences)

Josef above touched on the critical issue that we are looking at... increasing the time to kill. I'll go as far as saying this... some of the medium and heavy 'Mechs went through a quirk balance pass. This has not happened for any of the assaults. Currently, assaults are a little too agile for what they are... the giant sledge hammers of the battlefield. The two Mechs which are currently above expected behaviour are the Highlander AND the Victor. Now keep in mind, it is not just the chassis that is the problem in this case, the jump jet effects on turning and lift also compound the issue with these two 'Mechs specifically. We will be addressing both issues at the same time.

Remember.. the nerf gun is a mid caliber gun... it can do little to medium changes but it's not going to render the targets useless.[/color]
[color=cyan]

[/color]

I really dont find Victor "above expected behaviour" as you need to equip XL to be able to mount some serious Firepower on it, while maintaining high speed. Don't break my Victor please. Or break it, after clan tech has entered the game. Then i won't give a f*** about Victor as well.

Thank you.

[kaffeangst]

@ kbilly

"at the end of the day, no one cares about you"

Really? For somebody who doesn't post on the forums, such as yourself... two of your five total posts are in regards to the House of Lords. Thanks for caring about us, kbilly. We appreciate your posts and feedback. Sorry that we bother you enough to warrant a post.

LORD KAFFEANGST
ggclose™

[Artgathan]

MechB Kotare, on 14 February 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

I really dont find Victor "above expected behaviour" as you need to equip XL to be able to mount some serious Firepower on it, while maintaining high speed. Don't break my Victor please. Or break it, after clan tech has entered the game. Then i won't give a f*** about Victor as well.

Thank you.

I guess ultimately it comes down to what "expected behaviour" is. Using a stock engine (320) the Victor has a turn speed of 55.03 deg/sec (fully mastered). This means that if you combine torso twist speed + turn speed, the Victor can track mechs running at 108kph as close to them as 10m (meaning that if you're trying to shoot something at 10m and it runs 108.1 kph, it'll be able to circle you faster than you can turn). That's before you add in jump jets.

Consider this: has any mech been able to outmaneuver you in your Victor? Ever? The weakness of assault mechs is "supposed" to be their mobility - light and medium mechs are supposed to be able to (mostly) avoid their guns through clever piloting and paper-cut the Assault to death. In MWO we don't really have that.