51 replies to this topic

[Eglar]

El Bandito, on 16 April 2014 - 04:22 AM, said:

I heavily disagree. MW4-esque different sized hard points would be more fitting to the lore. Mech chassis selection are not significantly greater than MW4 and less than MW2, for example.

Tabletop:


MWO:


MW4:

El Bandito, on 16 April 2014 - 04:22 AM, said:

In fact MWO is lacking when compared to some other MW games due to ONLY releasing mechs with at least 3 variants. No Flashman? Get out of here.

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the flashman only available in MW2Mercs? I understand that none of the BT-games have the full spectrum of mechs available but MWO has released unseen mechs! (while the SDH,GRF BTR are far from the original one I still loved them) Here I might also be wrong but as a Vanilla game, MWO has the most mech-variations compared to all other BT games and even if not they will eventually get there because they are releasing new mechs pretty fast.

El Bandito, on 16 April 2014 - 04:22 AM, said:

And don't bet anything on CW yet--especially with the pace PGI is moving forward. I am sick and tired of people calling CW the be all and end all, answer to life love and everything in MWO. I'll believe it when I see it, not before.

Compared to last year? i am really happy about what PGI did since 2014 and have absolutely no reason to complain.

[Ultimax]

GreyGriffin, on 15 April 2014 - 10:31 PM, said:

The current meta punishes mediums and lights under 120 kph enough, without also dragging down their torso twist speed.

I don't have any mediums that move over 120 kph, and their torso twist speed seems fine to me.

Which mechs do you think are unfairly penalized?


As for lights, I have to wonder if we are playing the same game or not.


If you tie twist speed to heat you will be reinforcing aspects of "the current meta" like heavy ballistics, and long long range sniper fests.


Brawling is already a difficult, and risky prospect, brawling builds often run very hot - and you want to cripple their twist even further?

I think this would just be an awful idea.

[Asmudius Heng]

Prezimonto, on 16 April 2014 - 04:30 AM, said:

The real problem is that we have essentially FREE in builds XL engines. It costs nothing to more engines around, and it costs nothing to repair them.

REALLY big standard engines are so heavy most builds have to deal with a lot less weaponry to fit them in. XL engines lets you push your engine rating really high while keeping or improving your weapon loadout.

Now add the rest of the upgrades as well.

There's a reason mechs die too fast, and a reason we have severe weapon balance problems.

Most of our AC's/PPCs are in an okay place at the moment, it's when you double up, triple up, and pair them into large alpha's there's a problem.

At the OP... I don't mind if engine size affects torso twist speeds, but the real culprit is XL engines. I don't think anyone really thinks the Stalker or most Atlases cruise and more too fast, but neither mech does very well with XL engines.

I suggested a partial solution in the second link in my signature. Essentially, standard equipment should give mechs boosts to internal equipment, and the more effective the upgrade is, the larger the internal HP boost should be. Players would then have to choose more carefully, offensive power, or defensive power.

I like that idea actually ... though I do not know if it will solve the bigger = better mentality for engines due to agility bonuses.

The idea that XL engines make a mech more fragile and standards are more durable is interesting.

XL has serious drawbacks such as taking 6 extra crit slots and dying through a side torso but yoiu get a huge amount of extra tonnage to spend on payload.

Personally i run a LOT of XL engines though because I do feel that the pros far outweight the negatives on most mechs.

- More weapons
- Faster
- More agile
- More internal heat sink space (which pays for the lost crit slots very easily with double heat sinks)

I can outlay more damage and if i am careful i can soak a fair bit of incoming fire .... the vast majority of my deaths are through the CT still even when i get torn down side torso armour.

I think think agility should not be tied as closely to the engine as it is now but your idea is a good way to make chosing engine types a more interesting risk vs reward situation and would define roles a little more.

So thanks for the link

[Bishop Steiner]

El Bandito, on 16 April 2014 - 02:24 AM, said:

Enlighten me then.

1. Mech models are more liberally interpreted than any of the previous MW games.



Need I go on?

while I am not disagreeing with you, nor agreeing with Elgar per se......

the first is a bad thing how? The number one thing that MW needed, over past titles was Mechs that actually didn't look like the doodles of a 5 year old child.

Now, as for "closest" to TT....MW3 still takes that prize to my mind, which is why it was also the most easily abused MultiPlayer of all MW titles. (MW2 was better overall for gameplay and fun, but the PPCs? ....... yeah.........)

Some ideas, are needed for translating from TT to Video Game.

What I find odd, is for some reason previous MW titles were using stock damage, ranges, etc and somehow didn't need to double armor to survive...... funny that.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 16 April 2014 - 07:18 AM.

[Trauglodyte]

GreyGriffin, on 15 April 2014 - 10:31 PM, said:

As the title says, torso twist speed should be tied to 2 factors: what chassis you are piloting and how much heat you have. The current meta punishes mediums and lights under 120 kph enough, without also dragging down their torso twist speed. This also adds an additional element of skill to heat management, although energy weapons may need a modest decrease in heat gain.

This also allows 'mechs firing arcs and torso twist to be balanced independently of how fast their footspeed is.

I'd like to agree with you but physics kind of disagrees with you. But, I'll definitely thumbs up the impact of heat on movement.

Joseph Mallan, on 16 April 2014 - 04:46 AM, said:

Awwwwww!!! If they weren't so damned slobbery, I'd totally buy a Blood Hound.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 16 April 2014 - 08:51 AM.

[Mechteric]

I think heat should definitely play a bigger role than it currently does (like slow the mech speed and twist speed down when really hot), but I do like that the engine and the chassis both determine speed of torso twisting and chassis turn rate.

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 16 April 2014 - 08:54 AM.

[Trauglodyte]

CapperDeluxe, on 16 April 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

I think heat should definitely play a bigger role than it currently does (like slow the mech speed and twist speed down when really hot), but I do like that the engine and the chassis both determine speed of torso twisting and chassis turn rate.

I think that it is rather simple to do this:

0-20% heat: no changes to your mech
21-60% heat: your efficiences begin to become reduced until they're at 0 at 60% heat
61-99% heat: your efficiencies now begin to become penalties until you shut down

Work would need to be done to differentiate 1x and 2x efficiencies as well as working in penalties for mechs that have nothing. Definitely a coding hassle but I would like to think that it would provide a better overall environment for the game and would go a long way to making people manage their heat.

[DONTOR]

Engine size should still matter, but you could add heat on top of it. Taking the biggest engine possible should have more benefits than just speed for the tonnage spent, IMO.

[Mazzyplz]

yeah engine shouldn't affect it as much, but the change needed is slight.

[Ultimax]

Trauglodyte, on 16 April 2014 - 09:24 AM, said:

I think that it is rather simple to do this:

0-20% heat: no changes to your mech
21-60% heat: your efficiences begin to become reduced until they're at 0 at 60% heat
61-99% heat: your efficiencies now begin to become penalties until you shut down

Work would need to be done to differentiate 1x and 2x efficiencies as well as working in penalties for mechs that have nothing. Definitely a coding hassle but I would like to think that it would provide a better overall environment for the game and would go a long way to making people manage their heat.

And what do you think the impact would be on long range vs. short range gameplay?

I apologize to TT enthusiasts, but these are penalties that I do not think we need in a game where:

> The longest possible match time is 15 minutes
> High heat builds are disadvantaged vs. low heat builds.
> Short range is inherently disadvantaged vs. long range (outside of a few maps where everyone spawns in the same locker room).

[Mazzyplz]

Trauglodyte, on 16 April 2014 - 09:24 AM, said:

I think that it is rather simple to do this:

0-20% heat: no changes to your mech
21-60% heat: your efficiences begin to become reduced until they're at 0 at 60% heat
61-99% heat: your efficiencies now begin to become penalties until you shut down

Work would need to be done to differentiate 1x and 2x efficiencies as well as working in penalties for mechs that have nothing. Definitely a coding hassle but I would like to think that it would provide a better overall environment for the game and would go a long way to making people manage their heat.

and then you have everyone running medium lasers. congratulations;
no- stupid idea. next please

all of these ideas about heat are pretty stupid; just make the engine not affect twist as much. you're punishing energy boats YET AGAIN because you meta humping newbs like your autocannon with 0 heat.
just ****** off

[FupDup]

DONTOR, on 16 April 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:

Engine size should still matter, but you could add heat on top of it. Taking the biggest engine possible should have more benefits than just speed for the tonnage spent, IMO.

You already gain more slots for DHS and increased agility (i.e. turning, arm swinging rates, etc.). It's pretty much an arm's race to get one of the biggest engines you can get much of the time. There's already no point in the smaller engines as it is, especially on light mechs where the sub-250 engines don't even have all 10 base sinks built in to them (have to be taxed of external slots for some dumb reason).

[DONTOR]

Eglar, on 16 April 2014 - 04:59 AM, said:

Compared to last year? i am really happy about what PGI did since 2014 and have absolutely no reason to complain.

You said it Eglar!

[Mazzyplz]

willing to bet these guys who are asking for the heat stuff don't actually have to manage any heat themselves because they're running ACs. they just want the enemy to not be able to fight back

[GreyGriffin]

Wow, what, uhm, aren't we a bit late for a hardpoint vs. free build debate? Or at least in the wrong thread? I have to weigh in for a second and say that game mechanics are not "canon." They are abstractions that we use to emulate a setting, which, though I am loath to use the term, represents its own "canon," or the known facts of the universe we are attempting to peer into. Canon like a single Centurion (Yen Lo Wang) holding off 2 companies of 'Mechs with nothing but an AC 20 and a hatchet, or Aiden Pryde's Timber Wolf scoring 6 confirmed kills with his ER Small Laser (his last operational weapon system) against the Com Guards.

'Mech customization and its nitty gritty has never really been a huge part of the fiction other than to say it is difficult and often more trouble than it is worth unless done by professionals (or prodigies) in specialized facilities (or a scaffolding in a jungle in a dramatically appropriate narrative moment).

ANYWAYS.

Decoupling Torso Twist (and maybe even chassis turn speed) from engine size will allow much more fine balancing between chassis that will result in chassis being much more unique. Maybe narrow twist ranges can result in very fast torso twisting,making the Stalker a great alpha striker without relying on huge engines. Additionally, wider twist ranges can actually have things like sliding scales - maybe out to 90 degrees your torso glides fast, but to get to 120, the 'mech stretches a bit and the twist slows down. It can also let Assaults with huge engines still retain their unique feel (a bit sluggish), opening the field somewhat for heavies and mediums, and even lighter assaults like the Victor and Battlemaster.

It also doesn't create a huge balance issue for the Urbanmech. That is obviously the most important side effect of this decoupling.

Reduced torso responsiveness really seems like the only way to make heat affect accuracy since people still inexplicably scream RNG when you suggest cone of fire. The jump sniper alpha meta isn't going to be solved by this, and this really isn't designed to address that. That is a whole 'nother bag of cats. This is really about making heat have an effect before you shut down and/or blow up.

[Trauglodyte]

Ultimatum X, on 16 April 2014 - 09:31 AM, said:

And what do you think the impact would be on long range vs. short range gameplay? I apologize to TT enthusiasts, but these are penalties that I do not think we need in a game where: > The longest possible match time is 15 minutes > High heat builds are disadvantaged vs. low heat builds. > Short range is inherently disadvantaged vs. long range (outside of a few maps where everyone spawns in the same locker room).

Long range vs short game doesn't matter because the heat is all the same. Your typical poptarter runs 2 PPCs + whatever else. Heat isn't a factor because you're hiding behind cover and blasting away until you get into the critical area only to stop firing. You vent heat as your position and inbetween volleys. The Short Range game is the same because you're not firing as you move into position. The point is that you need to manage your heat regardless of the range you're fighting because it causes detrimental impacts to your ability to move, aim, and fire. That, you know, slows the game down.

Mazzyplz, on 16 April 2014 - 09:32 AM, said:

and then you have everyone running medium lasers. congratulations; no- stupid idea. next please all of these ideas about heat are pretty stupid; just make the engine not affect twist as much. you're punishing energy boats YET AGAIN because you meta humping newbs like your autocannon with 0 heat. just ****** off

willing to bet these guys who are asking for the heat stuff don't actually have to manage any heat themselves because they're running ACs. they just want the enemy to not be able to fight back

Sounds like a childish rant about someone that can't fight back. For your information, I don't run meta builds. I have one and that is my Victor which is collecting dust as I play the mechs that I enjoy more: my Mediums. I find it funny that you have to resort to attacks because, at the core, you just don't want to manage your own heat either. The whole point of HEAT in Battle Tech is to be a combat limiter. Whether it makes you more vulnerable because you're not as agile or it makes you less accurate, the whole point is for you to protect your mech at all costs. Roasting yourself to go buck wild on the battlefield without repercussions isn't combat.

[xengk]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 April 2014 - 07:17 AM, said:

Now, as for "closest" to TT....MW3 still takes that prize to my mind, which is why it was also the most easily abused MultiPlayer of all MW titles. (MW2 was better overall for gameplay and fun, but the PPCs? ....... yeah.........)

Some ideas, are needed for translating from TT to Video Game.

What I find odd, is for some reason previous MW titles were using stock damage, ranges, etc and somehow didn't need to double armor to survive...... funny that.

I sorta like the ball lightning PPC, although they are hard as ball to hit anything on dial-up.

As to mech survival, have you even pilot a Nova in MW2:Mercs?
Those thing are extremely vicious medium mech that tore through mechs it encounter in seconds.

Im looking forward to receiving mine from the Clan pack. (ghost heat be damned!)

[Ultimax]

GreyGriffin, on 16 April 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

Additionally, wider twist ranges can actually have things like sliding scales - maybe out to 90 degrees your torso glides fast, but to get to 120, the 'mech stretches a bit and the twist slows down. It can also let Assaults with huge engines still retain their unique feel (a bit sluggish), opening the field somewhat for heavies and mediums, and even lighter assaults like the Victor and Battlemaster.

I'll assume you've tried to fit something like a 350 standard engine into an Atlas before.

The only real reason to do this is if you really need better twist to brawl.

If you're not going to brawl, you're better off with a 325 to 300.

When you go from a 300 STD to a 350 STD you sacrifice 11.5 tons to move ... 7kph faster.

That's really not any kind of incentive.


So if you are going to decouple torso twist from these humongous, super heavy engines that can weigh more than the heaviest light mech chassis on their own (STD 350 = 36.5 Tons) - you need to give some reason for players to actually sacrifice that enormous amount of tonnage (and therefore loss of overall firepower) - because I promise you 7kph is not the reason you try to stuff a massive engine into a 100 ton assault.

GreyGriffin, on 16 April 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

This is really about making heat have an effect before you shut down and/or blow up.

Heat already has an effect, it means lower sustained fire.

It means you risk shutting down while your enemies can pump you full of damage.

[mogs01gt]

This game and community really needs to get away from Lore in order to make MWO more popular.. If there was a PvE mode or a single player campaign, then Lore matters.

[Ultimax]

Trauglodyte, on 16 April 2014 - 09:46 AM, said:

Long range vs short game doesn't matter because the heat is all the same. Your typical poptarter runs 2 PPCs + whatever else. Heat isn't a factor because you're hiding behind cover and blasting away until you get into the critical area only to stop firing. You vent heat as your position and inbetween volleys. The Short Range game is the same because you're not firing as you move into position. The point is that you need to manage your heat regardless of the range you're fighting because it causes detrimental impacts to your ability to move, aim, and fire. That, you know, slows the game down.

No, that's really not what I see.

The long range game stays the same, as you say. No real impact.

The short range game becomes even more prohibitive.

The short range game is already extremely high heat, this would basically cripple it.




I fail to see how this change would add fun to the game, it looks like a level of annoyance right up there with Ghost Heat.

I have no interest in mechanics that do not add more fun and instead look to decrease fun and viability of some builds/mech chassis.