404 replies to this topic

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 05 March 2014 - 09:54 PM, said:

What most people tend to suggest? There are a lot of radical views. I actually like yours since you take a middle ground. Wich is my own personal philosophy. Ive seen oh.... off the top of my head the last one I saw basically suggested all weapons firing in 10 second intervals and only doing the exact BT value over those 10 seconds... I want you for a moment to imagine the ac2 firing every ten seconds..... *winces* I think I would be able to take a quick beer run to the fridge in between shots.

Well, I know it's lame, but that's how it was in TT. An AC2 did 2 points of damage every round, which is ten seconds of game time. The advantage was that it was the only weapon that had a greater range than LRMs.

The problem is everyone has been spoiled by the drastic increase in DPS for all autocannons, especially the AC2, and now thinks that is how it should be. Autocannons are supposed to be categorized by the amount of damage they do in a set period of time (traditionally 10 seconds, but that doesn't really matter). Regardless of caliber size or rate of fire, that classification is what matters (DPS). The lower the classification (DPS), the smaller, lighter, and longer ranged the weapon is.

If they were all normalized like this, you could have long range versions (AC2) that do low DPS either through high rate small caliber harasser rounds (10 x 0.2 damage per "turn") or slow rate high caliber sniper rounds (10 damage with 20 second cooldown), all the way up to short range versions (AC20) that do high DPS either through high rate small caliber barrage rounds (10 x 2 damage per "turn") or slow rate high caliber BFG rounds (20 damage with 5 second cooldown).

[Nicholas Carlyle]

If you guys are looking for an answer to this. Tweet Russ and ask him the question, maybe link the thread.

So far the last 3 or 4 times I've done that he has replied and in some cases (SRM's needing to be higher priority) he included Paul on the response to sort of poke him about it.

Not saying it's perfect, but treat him respectfully and he'll tend to answer.

[Varent]

Eldagore, on 06 March 2014 - 05:22 AM, said:

If you read that more closely, he did not say it would fire every ten seconds. he used the ten seconds to normalize the DPS of each class of AC. I dont care for the method myself, I think it would create a scenario where the only difference between AC is sound and slug velocity/range.

I dont mind the idea of multilpe types of same class AC either, but I am at a loss currently how one would make them equally appealing. FLD in pinpoint location is so preferable IMO the burst fire versions would need to have a significant bonus to their use, like 50% heat generation or somthing. This is why I advocate my "tube" method, because it limits things like AC40 jagers without really removing the possibility of a solid round AC20- it would just be limited by chassis ability, which in turn creates a whole new level of variety in the game/mechlab.

just read over the many many many many many many ideas in this thread. There are several good ones. Many of wich allow for both parties to be happy.

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 06 March 2014 - 07:56 AM, said:

Well, I know it's lame, but that's how it was in TT. An AC2 did 2 points of damage every round, which is ten seconds of game time. The advantage was that it was the only weapon that had a greater range than LRMs.

The problem is everyone has been spoiled by the drastic increase in DPS for all autocannons, especially the AC2, and now thinks that is how it should be. Autocannons are supposed to be categorized by the amount of damage they do in a set period of time (traditionally 10 seconds, but that doesn't really matter). Regardless of caliber size or rate of fire, that classification is what matters (DPS). The lower the classification (DPS), the smaller, lighter, and longer ranged the weapon is.

If they were all normalized like this, you could have long range versions (AC2) that do low DPS either through high rate small caliber harasser rounds (10 x 0.2 damage per "turn") or slow rate high caliber sniper rounds (10 damage with 20 second cooldown), all the way up to short range versions (AC20) that do high DPS either through high rate small caliber barrage rounds (10 x 2 damage per "turn") or slow rate high caliber BFG rounds (20 damage with 5 second cooldown).

my own viewpoint is I dont find it spoiled at all. I find that its normalized for an online shooter. Then again I am playing MWO expecting an online shooter. I feel others are playing MWO expecting battletech. TBH... I love board games, hell I was playing a few the other night with friends over beer. That is not to say I want my video games to be like board games. I already feel (personally) that mwo is pretty much the slowest shooter out there that I (personally) could stand but still enjoy. It takes a long time to get into combat really. usually 2-3 minutes. As your slowly jockeying for position and trying to figure out where the enemy is. Then you usually have several long tense minutes of fighting wich tends to go on for about 5 minutes where your slowly losing armor and playing the attrition game, getting kills and losing weapons and ammo till either the game finally ends, or you get killed. Some games alsting longer depending on the overall flow.

I will admit there are some games out there with an equally slow feel to them W0T is one of them. I dont play it myself. I tried... I found it incredibly incredibly boring and unsatisfying. Eve is another. Personally I grew up on the books. I loved the fast paced combat described in them. What I dont feel many realize is I think many feel they are the heroes in the books, diving into combat again and again and again. When in reality most mechs are described being shot to death and destroyed fairly quickly by those same heroes. Its called embelishment for artistical purposes and the sake of making the hero feel like a hero.

That is why my own thoughts also move away from slowing the game down. Frankly because once ac are nerfed people will just go to srm, and still people will die fast (trust me I know because im good with srm and kill people VERY fast). This line of thought wont end until either all weapons are nerfed and the game is so slow I might as well pull out the board game or not play. OR people just realize its a video game and its not meant to be slow paced but instead fast and exciting.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 06 March 2014 - 07:58 AM, said:

If you guys are looking for an answer to this. Tweet Russ and ask him the question, maybe link the thread.

So far the last 3 or 4 times I've done that he has replied and in some cases (SRM's needing to be higher priority) he included Paul on the response to sort of poke him about it.

Not saying it's perfect, but treat him respectfully and he'll tend to answer.

I dont use twitter out of spite. *grumpy*

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I use twitter for Fantasy Football and expanded into MW:O. If enough of us bug him (nicely) about it, I think he'll bother Paul for us.

[Varent]

I just hate twitter by concept. Sorta feel it was unnecary with facebook and tons of other social media out there. Its like... why make another? I honestly dont understand that one. But as I said, im grumpy over it so I just refuse to follow it.

[Bulvar Jorgensson]

Weapon systems in Mwo seem to work fairly well tbh,
there is however an issue where players expect to alpha strike to their wee hearts content with the intent of nuking down any opponent before they Alpha nuke back.....

MWO is in trouble of becoming a victim of its own mechanics, Take for instance a normal mech bought for cbill's.....cicada 2a©..this mech comes with 6x medium lasers.....but some smart individual realises,
CDA-2A Garth Erlam Build (6x MLas, XL300)


Now mr Erlam in his wisdom states..."The key here is that you want to maximize your first 3-4 Alphas, because you'll be alternating firing 'arms' after that."
This then becomes a norm, where alpha striking is not a last ditch pain spike of weapon fire (where your mech shuts down as you've fried your weapon circuitry and blown a few boards) but a first and so on strike until, you have to cool-down your mech to rinse and repeat.

Tactical use of your weapons should be a major factor in MWO, setting up weapon groups to optimise damage returns, without alpha striking all your weapons.
How many players look at a mech for what its hardpoints/meta build is before buying it, i would reckon at least 80% if not more as no-one wants to be the bloke bringing a knife to a gun fight, paraphrasing a famous film quote there.

How does this get fixed.....who knows, I will say this though wait till Clan-packs become available, then see the waters go blood red with Alpha strikes that will have all players asking do I want to poke my head out over this ridge..........

Edited by Bulvar Jorgensson, 06 March 2014 - 09:06 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Varent, on 06 March 2014 - 08:58 AM, said:

I just hate twitter by concept. Sorta feel it was unnecary with facebook and tons of other social media out there. Its like... why make another? I honestly dont understand that one. But as I said, im grumpy over it so I just refuse to follow it.

Twitter and Facebook are really different beasts.

With Facebook, you are becoming friends, and sharing stuff. Adding all kinds of personal information. It's more like a dating service.

With Twitter, you follow Russ...and all you see is what Russ tweets or reposts. It's much more simplistic.

Basically make a twitter account, follow the 5-6 relevant PGI twitter handles, and you are good to go.

[Varent]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 06 March 2014 - 09:10 AM, said:

Twitter and Facebook are really different beasts.

With Facebook, you are becoming friends, and sharing stuff. Adding all kinds of personal information. It's more like a dating service.

With Twitter, you follow Russ...and all you see is what Russ tweets or reposts. It's much more simplistic.

Basically make a twitter account, follow the 5-6 relevant PGI twitter handles, and you are good to go.

thing is, ever heard of facebook fan pages? there is nothing on them but basically 'tweets' from the artist, actor, etc. quick little plurps but it has pictures and more. Why need twitter when there is a facebook fan page? o.O

And its not that its not 'easy to do' I know it is. It just frustrates me to see everyone hoping on that band wagon because 'its hip' I suppose. I hate trends. Specially when there is already something out there that does the same thing.

Edited by Varent, 06 March 2014 - 09:23 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Varent, on 06 March 2014 - 09:22 AM, said:

thing is, ever heard of facebook fan pages? there is nothing on them but basically 'tweets' from the artist, actor, etc. quick little plurps but it has pictures and more. Why need twitter when there is a facebook fan page? o.O

And its not that its not 'easy to do' I know it is. It just frustrates me to see everyone hoping on that band wagon because 'its hip' I suppose. I hate trends. Specially when there is already something out there that does the same thing.

Well here is...if you want to talk to Russ. Twitter is where to do it.

I get responses all the time from him. And I'm really begining to think Paul is the problem.

[Varent]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 06 March 2014 - 09:44 AM, said:

Well here is...if you want to talk to Russ. Twitter is where to do it.

I get responses all the time from him. And I'm really begining to think Paul is the problem.

*insert dissapointed sound here* Why make a forums for a game if your going to use another social feed more....

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Varent, on 06 March 2014 - 09:45 AM, said:

*insert dissapointed sound here* Why make a forums for a game if your going to use another social feed more....

Trust me...I did that rant for about 6 months when I first started.

But like convergence, it will not be changing. So adapt and get your input heard.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Varent - you're way to young to be a grumpy old man. At least I have a good excuse for ignoring twitter, I'm twice your age.

[Varent]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 06 March 2014 - 11:54 AM, said:

Varent - you're way to young to be a grumpy old man. At least I have a good excuse for ignoring twitter, I'm twice your age.

Im law enforcement.

Deal with the dregs of society on a daily basis and witness first hand the horrors some people are capable of and you really wont want to deal with people at all and will probly feel twice your age.

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 06 March 2014 - 08:28 AM, said:

my own viewpoint is I dont find it spoiled at all. I find that its normalized for an online shooter. Then again I am playing MWO expecting an online shooter. I feel others are playing MWO expecting battletech. TBH... I love board games, hell I was playing a few the other night with friends over beer. That is not to say I want my video games to be like board games. I already feel (personally) that mwo is pretty much the slowest shooter out there that I (personally) could stand but still enjoy. It takes a long time to get into combat really. usually 2-3 minutes. As your slowly jockeying for position and trying to figure out where the enemy is. Then you usually have several long tense minutes of fighting wich tends to go on for about 5 minutes where your slowly losing armor and playing the attrition game, getting kills and losing weapons and ammo till either the game finally ends, or you get killed. Some games alsting longer depending on the overall flow.

That is why my own thoughts also move away from slowing the game down. Frankly because once ac are nerfed people will just go to srm, and still people will die fast (trust me I know because im good with srm and kill people VERY fast). This line of thought wont end until either all weapons are nerfed and the game is so slow I might as well pull out the board game or not play. OR people just realize its a video game and its not meant to be slow paced but instead fast and exciting.

So you think the next meta weapon would be SRM, which spreads the damage out like I am suggesting autocannons do?

Making ballistics (and PPCs) spread their damage out does a few things. First, it means you don't get cored as quickly, since you can spread the damage out easier. That means everyone's individual TTKs goes up in general. Second, if everyone individually lives longer, that means they all stay in the fight longer and contribute their firepower longer, meaning your TTK as a group goes down. The end result is the actual fight takes roughly the same amount of time, but each individual is in it longer. Lastly, if everyone is slowly whittled down, their internals are exposed for longer periods of time, meaning the critical system now becomes important like it should be.

I'm not sure what your first sentence or two are talking about, though. Are you referring to how I want to normalize autocannons to each other? If so, you are being difficult just to be difficult. A 6-ton, 1-crit weapon should NEVER do more DPS out to three times the range (almost four) compared to something that is more than twice as heavy and takes up fourteen times the space. That is how the game currently stands, which is no where near normalized as an online shooter.

[Varent]

Im not being difficult to be difficult. I believe all the autocannon have there place currently with the exception of the ac10. That is however simply my own opinion of the ac10, ive heard others defend it, so whatever. Your comparing the weapons by dps only and not use overall in different situations with everything factored in.

im not going to repeat myself again on the advantages and disadvantages of balistic and srm. its there. I dont feel like being a broken record atm.

[Cimarb]

Varent, on 06 March 2014 - 02:13 PM, said:

Im not being difficult to be difficult. I believe all the autocannon have there place currently with the exception of the ac10. That is however simply my own opinion of the ac10, ive heard others defend it, so whatever. Your comparing the weapons by dps only and not use overall in different situations with everything factored in.

im not going to repeat myself again on the advantages and disadvantages of balistic and srm. its there. I dont feel like being a broken record atm.

But you are...

All of the autocannons have their place currently. Adding variety to every one of them through manufacturers, as well as differentiating them by classification like they were meant to be, means MORE options for EVERY role. I'm comparing them by DPS because that is what classification IS based upon - you are saying a small laser should do the same damage as a large laser, but with a different range (it's reversed compared to ACs, but same concept).

[Varent]

Cimarb, on 06 March 2014 - 02:21 PM, said:

But you are...

All of the autocannons have their place currently. Adding variety to every one of them through manufacturers, as well as differentiating them by classification like they were meant to be, means MORE options for EVERY role. I'm comparing them by DPS because that is what classification IS based upon - you are saying a small laser should do the same damage as a large laser, but with a different range (it's reversed compared to ACs, but same concept).

no im really not.

Your basing your statistics of (every ac being the same) based off dps. Wich ive stated already is a horrible system because it doesnt take alot of other mechanics into play. The ac2 has alot of dps sure, but you have to hold on target, its fairly heat intensive and while your holding on target you cant Torso twist. The ac2 has great range but scatters rounds quite abit due to having to hold on target and has no significant "burst damage' or FLD . The the ac 5 are a great overall ranged weapon where as the uac5 is more of a brawling weapon with range capabilities. It has strength weaknesses. Both of them have a relatively small amount of damage to other weapon systems (only 5). The ac 20 is a great bruising weapon up close with a large amount of heat, huge size, huge weight and low ammo. It has a tremendous FLD but other draw backs. Each of these weapons has its use in different circles. As ive said I feel the ac10 is the left out ugly duckling.. .however ive had others defend it and I suppose it is a good go between if you want a good FLD weapon but still want more range then the ac20. Just depends I suppose.

That said the balance with those weapons is in there different uses with FLD being a premium based off weight and size. Which makes sense.

[Zordicron]

Bulvar Jorgensson, on 06 March 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

*snip
alpha striking is not a last ditch pain spike of weapon fire (where your mech shuts down as you've fried your weapon circuitry and blown a few boards) but a first and so on strike until, you have to cool-down your mech to rinse and repeat.

Tactical use of your weapons should be a major factor in MWO, setting up weapon groups to optimise damage returns, without alpha striking all your weapons.
How many players look at a mech for what its hardpoints/meta build is before buying it, i would reckon at least 80% if not more as no-one wants to be the bloke bringing a knife to a gun fight, paraphrasing a famous film quote there.

How does this get fixed.....who knows, I will say this though wait till Clan-packs become available, then see the waters go blood red with Alpha strikes that will have all players asking do I want to poke my head out over this ridge..........

What you describe is the result of the heat scale being set up with a very high cap and low dissipation vs the other way around.

Go to youtube, search for some mechwarrior 3 clips of people playing. You will notice people go into the red on heat by fireing 2 LL off, but it comes down very quickly. Heh, really, the things people gripe about in MWO- they were all a non issue in MW3. I think that is part of why people can be grumpy about certain mechanics in MWO. Like the post a few back about expecting it to be a shooter vs battletech, and saying they dont want a boardgame.

It doesnt need to be a board game! HA, it has already been translated from board game to video game extremely well twice, and reasonably well once (twice if you count some of MekTek and Living Legends) and IMO, only mediocre in MWO so far.

Not sure what the deal is, any MW van would tell you the game mechanics of older games are why they are here. Certainly, alterations for the idea of PvP and new game engines etc need to happen. but core mechanics were balanced out and hashed out already, several times. It makes seeing the time to kill in MWO play like battlefield or CoD somewhat frustrating.

[Trauglodyte]

Well, I think you are both correct, Cmarb and Varent. Here is the kicker, though. ACs need to have their place when the mech is built around it. Mechs like the Hunchback 4G and the Victor 9S were both built to carry the AC20. The problem really comes when we shoe horn major weapons into slots not meant to carry them. It is a problem because you're still getting the major performance from a slot not built to hold it. That isn't to say that there isn't room in the mech to carry the weapon because all mechs have a plethora of space built in "just in case". *wink wink* The AC40 Jager is a prime example. The A came standard with AC2s while the DD and the S were built around the AC2 and the U/AC5. Yet, here we are with people running around with AC20s in those slots.

Now, some people want to keep ACs as FLD and that is fine. Others want them turned into burst/burp/sustained types of weapons and that is just fine as well. There is grey area there, though, I believe. It has been said before but I wonder if the missile tube count wouldn't solve the problem. If you take the mech that carries the appropriate weapon, or one that is smaller, you're fine and may keep the FLD. Take something that was built for something smaller and you have to deal with the repercussions.

On the flip side, we could just have PGI decide how our weapons act by implementing manufacturer quirks. Then again, people would just clammer to the weapons that are FDL which would lead us right back to where we are.