Ran into a team today that was running 10 freaking AC40 Jagers. Tore our team to pieces in minutes. I haven't been in a game without at least seeing two of those things in ages. And despite being glass cannons, their weapons are so high that as long as they have a ridge to hump, they may as well have better armor than an Atlas. Honestly, it's a very effective build, and that's why so many people are using them. But it's breaking this game.
It's either get your ass kicked consistently, or join in the douchebaggery. Because of this, diversity is suffering a lot. A good number of mechs are WORTHLESS if you want to be any good at all. I'll probably get a lot of flack for this, and some "learn to play!"s and "Quit whining!"s, but I feel it needs to be said and addressed. I have been playing this game since just after closed beta, and feel I know what I'm talking about because of all the time and effort I have put into it.
I don't know how to fix the dual AC/20 Jager. Absolutely no idea that wouldn't ruin the AC/20 as a weapon. But I think it needs done, as well as some of the useless mechs you never see getting some love. I don't want more mechs, I don't want sales on paint colors or new UI features, I just want the damn mechs to all be viable for all levels of play so the game doesn't feel stale. I have been a long-time player and have put some money into this, and don't want the game to fail, but the current state of affairs is turning me off to it.
Anyone have any CONSTRUCTIVE ideas or comments? (I know that's like asking for a chunk of gold-plated unicorn poop around here, but nothing ventured nothing gained.)
Edit: I think I should add that I'm not doing bad, have a pretty decent K/D in pure pugs. My gameplay isn't really an issue, I'm just tired of seeing the same-old shit all the time.
Sniper mechs kill AC40 Jagers, along with good torso twisting. The recharge time on AC20s is long enough to take a hit to the arm then pump damage in, and Jagermechs can't torso twist in response to the mech design.
They also just about all have XL engines, so there's that too...
The AC40 Jager is a pretty limited mech- it's short range, runs hot, dependent on ammo, and they general have XL engines with very vulnerable side torsi.
While it does suck that you ran into 10 of them, and that probably wasn't fun, there is currently a bug that lets organized teams of 12 drop in the normal queue- so it's likely that there was a large group of people running that to troll. It sucks, but it won't be happening for much longer.
I'm not saying that there is currently tons of mech diversity and that the overall situation is fine, I would list about half of the mechs as marginal or worthless, and of the half that are useful, many are very situational. That said, this instance is more about ten people being ******** than a statement on mech diversity.
Anyone have any CONSTRUCTIVE ideas or comments? (I know that's like asking for a chunk of gold-plated unicorn poop around here, but nothing ventured nothing gained.)
ARMOR CONCEPT!
Take mech variants. Find stock armor. Use stock armor to make new max armor values.
See here. It should be accompanied with a revamping of engine limits.
Quick example. Cataphract 3D. Meta mech, jumps, etc. Best Cataphract.
But wait. Least armored Cataphract!
The 2X is the middle ground. And the 4X is the most armored Cataphract. It is also the slowest and often least-desired.
Second quick example. It'd create mechs with more armor than others of other tonnages.
Blackjack, a 45 ton mech, has equal armor to a Centurion A, which is a 50 ton mech, and they both have better armor than a Shadowhawk 2D2, who in turn has immensely superior firepower and speed.
Most Shadowhawks have less armor than the Hunchbacks. Centurions have less than Hunchbacks too.
The Hunchback has equal armor to the Catapult C1.
But a Shadowhawk 5M however has superior armor to the Hunchback, and is equal to the Centurion AL (the least loved Centurion). I should also mention the 5M has some of the "worst" hardpoints according to most Shadowhawk users (probably because it's a jack of trades in terms of hardpoints with no emphasis or specialty).
A Dragon 1-C (60 tons) has better armor than most 60, 65, some 70, some 75, some 80, and on par with some 85 ton mechs. Dragons are also classified as brawlers; but can't brawl in MWO because all mechs can equip identical or better armor. From a stock standpoint though, Dragons are among some of the most armored mechs in ALL of Battletech.
These better armored variants tend to be the least desirable that a player can get, which now gives them purpose. Meanwhile, many of the most overpowered mechs just by stock are getting armor cutbacks, even though all we're doing is adding to stock armor.
If people would stop QQ'ing and going nerf nerf nerf. Leading to rampant nerfherding no matter the cost. More mechs and builds would be viable. However look at the forums for a bit. Guess that is not really wanted here.
Edited by Bartholomew bartholomew, 03 May 2014 - 09:11 PM.
As long as the game design supports utilizing weapons that all hit the same location instantaneously you aren't going to see much variety. Most of the kids that play this game don't care if your game experience is enjoyable, their only goal is to grow their epeens to the maximum size possible.
Any monkey can toss a couple of AC-20s, PPC's and AC-5's, and to a lesser extent, Gauss Rifles, and pug hunt quite successfully. As long as PGI encourages that play style you are not going to see a lot of folks piloting mechs that don't support those load outs.
Start charging a repair and rearm fee and change AC's from pinpoint instant damage to burst fire / damage over time ala beam weapons and people will have incentive to run a wider variety of mechs.
As long as the game design supports utilizing weapons that all hit the same location instantaneously you aren't going to see much variety. Most of the kids that play this game don't care if your game experience is enjoyable, their only goal is to grow their epeens to the maximum size possible.
Any monkey can toss a couple of AC-20s, PPC's and AC-5's, and to a lesser extent, Gauss Rifles, and pug hunt quite successfully. As long as PGI encourages that play style you are not going to see a lot of folks piloting mechs that don't support those load outs.
Start charging a repair and rearm fee and change AC's from pinpoint instant damage to burst fire / damage over time ala beam weapons and people will have incentive to run a wider variety of mechs.
How about legit ammo explosions? Not this 10% crap or whatever. I mean, who actually runs CASE?
Hopefully they'll get 3333 working and we'll get some variety in the mix.
Sadly, I think all this will do is force people to bring "the best" per weight class or feel they are weighing their team down.
3 Firestarters, Jenners, or ECM Lights
3 Shadowhawks
3 Jagers or Cataphract 3D's
3 Jump-jet Assaults with an occasional Atlas DDC or Ballistic-heavy Banshee tossed in.
Maybe thats why the more rare chassis-types usually work better.
Atleast for me that is,i`ll stick to my trenchbuckets and quickdraws to the bitter end,because they are the only ones that i can pilot properly.
Nothing is more satisfying than murder couple lances of premades with harmless,hopeless and obsolete chassis.
Take mech variants. Find stock armor. Use stock armor to make new max armor values.
See here. It should be accompanied with a revamping of engine limits.
Quick example. Cataphract 3D. Meta mech, jumps, etc. Best Cataphract.
But wait. Least armored Cataphract!
The 2X is the middle ground. And the 4X is the most armored Cataphract. It is also the slowest and often least-desired.
Second quick example. It'd create mechs with more armor than others of other tonnages.
Blackjack, a 45 ton mech, has equal armor to a Centurion A, which is a 50 ton mech, and they both have better armor than a Shadowhawk 2D2, who in turn has immensely superior firepower and speed.
Most Shadowhawks have less armor than the Hunchbacks. Centurions have less than Hunchbacks too.
The Hunchback has equal armor to the Catapult C1.
But a Shadowhawk 5M however has superior armor to the Hunchback, and is equal to the Centurion AL (the least loved Centurion). I should also mention the 5M has some of the "worst" hardpoints according to most Shadowhawk users (probably because it's a jack of trades in terms of hardpoints with no emphasis or specialty).
A Dragon 1-C (60 tons) has better armor than most 60, 65, some 70, some 75, some 80, and on par with some 85 ton mechs. Dragons are also classified as brawlers; but can't brawl in MWO because all mechs can equip identical or better armor. From a stock standpoint though, Dragons are among some of the most armored mechs in ALL of Battletech.
These better armored variants tend to be the least desirable that a player can get, which now gives them purpose. Meanwhile, many of the most overpowered mechs just by stock are getting armor cutbacks, even though all we're doing is adding to stock armor.
Enjoy your instant diversity.
Hello this would bring diversity how? It would make the meta-game further discriminate based on variants instead of just chassis as it is right now. Also the Hero mechs would have great Armour stats :-D
Hello this would bring diversity how? It would make the meta-game further discriminate based on variants instead of just chassis as it is right now. Also the Hero mechs would have great Armour stats :-D
Heroes would need adjustments. There's actually only 4 heroes with borked stats.
Huginn has, when rounding armor to divide by 36, 6.5 tons of armor. Raven 2X has 6.5 tons of armor, too.
The Oxide has identical armor to the Jenner D, which is identical to the Locust.
Most heroes are within reasonable limits. Muromets is 2 points short of the Cataphract 4X.
Meanwhile...
Jagermechs -- the most powerful mechs in the game in terms of firepower, range from 192 points to 256 points of armor. Note that 6 tons of armor is 192 points.
Meanwhile, Catapults have 320-ish points of armor typically, identical to the Hunchback.
Thunderbolts, range in the 400s. Alongside the Dragon 1C, this puts them near the Stalker in armor. Note that Thunderbolts and Dragons are "shit mechs" far as the game is concerned.
In general, the "garbage mechs" are getting armor buffs. The "incredibly awesome meta mechs" are generally getting armor nerfs. Even though everyone is getting an identical armor increase from stock.
How would that not increase diversity?
This has 40 tonners being on par with 25 and some 35 tonners. This has the 20 tonner on par with some 35 tonners. This has 60 tonners outperforming 80 tonners in armor (but in nothing else). Every "garbage" variant is typically higher in armor than the "meta" variants.
To further this along, mechs that clearly do the same thing as one mech but better (Shadowhawk and Hunchback) now become very different. With the exception of the SHK-5M, every single Shadowhawk is inferior in armor to the Hunchback line.
Shadowhawks are glorified recon mechs, spotters, etc., with between 4.5 tons to 10.5 tons of armor. (For obvious reasons the ones with lowest armor should be given other perks. Though instead of locking armor at stock, we're adding between 2 and 3 tons of armor to every stock config).
Kintaros retake their place as hit and run fighters; their higher armor than most Griffins allowing them some affordable advantage over the Griffins' jumpjet abilities.
Wolverines -- currently garbage -- become the leading role in 55 ton brawlers as it is written in the books, manuals and lore.
You want high manueverability? It comes at a cost. Want high firepower? It comes at a cost.
Right now the choices are Meta firepower or meta speed or Gimped. Because everything has max armor.
The choices would become: All firepower (low to no armor/speed)? All armor (low to no firepower/speed)? All speed (low to no armor/firepower)? High firepower and armor (and low speed)? High firepower and speed (and low armor)? High speed and armor (and low firepower)? Jack of all trades? And combinations of moderation with slight highs/lows.
Ok, you are giving examples which favor what you listed and would change some of the current meta-builds. But changing the metagame based on mech chassis will not bring in more diversity. You don't take the metagame as a whole into consideration, meaning Hardpoint locations, weapons, hitboxes.
I'll start with the Heavy Chassis:
Jager Mechs - Firebrand has far superior Armor, all other Jagers would be litterally useless except for extreme range 2xGauss + Erppc Sniper builds instead of dakka builds.At the same time the Firebrand can still load the most popular builds such as 2xUAC + 2xPCC, 2x UAC + 2x LLas (My favorite), 2x AC20, 2x Gauss.
So basically Jagers Shift to Pay to Win.
The Cataphracts: The 3D would be virtually useless except for some occasional 2x Gauss + PPC jump-snipers (see the resemblance with Jagers?)
Comparing the Illya vs the 4x the 3xUAC Illya would definitely win because it's 1. Much faster 2. Can load std engines. A slow Cataphract with 4 AC5 dakkas low-mounted in the arms is like a badly placed static turret. Which makes this chassis also P2W.
Dragons(As a chassis): I'd start with they have huge CT hitboxes, add they have bad weapon hardpoints, end with ST armor doesn't really help the dragon.
Catapults: Here again, the jester is far superior to the other variants since cats are CT-hit magnets (P2W?) all other variants are useless with 40 ct armor on a heavy and no definite advantage in terms of max-engine size or hardpoint locations. -> Catapults useless.
If you compare thunderbolds + orions you'd see that those mechs are far superior than Cats, most jags and most phracts. Though the Illya would still dominate.
I'm not going too deep into assaults but vtrs and stalkers will dominate, especially the misery with the ballistic hardpoint and dragonslayer with the superior weapon convergence. (ballistic & energy), HGN733 would be a decent missile boat (never understood why people prefer stalkers and btrs) Atlai will pretty much stay the same.
Mediums: This change hurts mediums the most it will make the SDH-5M currently in my opinion the BEST metabuild medium even better, no single other medium could even gent close. BJs with similar armor to cents and additional JJs in favor of XL(bj) vs STD (cent) engines will make bjs the better mechs unless on brawl-heavy games.
Lights: well generally speaking reducing armor on lights is stupid but I'll just go with Jenners-Fs instead of "any other light", occasionally firestarters and a raven3l with erlarge lasers. No more spiders no more jenner-Ds, no more Firestarters. locusts and commandos will still suck.
It's either get your ass kicked consistently, or join in the douchebaggery. Because of this, diversity is suffering a lot. A good number of mechs are WORTHLESS if you want to be any good at all.
I run a lot of "worthless mechs" by the forum standards... but that doesn't stop me from running them and doing well in them... Raven 4X Stalker 3F Dragon 1N Locust 3S (I kid you not!)
That aside, sometimes it's all in how you approach them, if you know they are coming. If you are a close range mech, they are probably going to eat you. If you are ranged, you can try to maintain that range to your advantage. However, I would not say that diversity is suffering. At least not in my matches/elo. I see all sorts of mechs, and I more commonly see 3-4 AC5 builds than I do dual AC20 jagers, when I see them.
Though, I do find it funny when I pick up my Dragon for a few matches. It's funny because I'm normally the only Dragon in the match... (Those are a mech you don't see too often.)
Ok, you are giving examples which favor what you listed and would change some of the current meta-builds. But changing the metagame based on mech chassis will not bring in more diversity. You don't take the metagame as a whole into consideration, meaning Hardpoint locations, weapons, hitboxes.
If you compare thunderbolds + orions you'd see that those mechs are far superior than Cats, most jags and most phracts. Though the Illya would still dominate.
I'm not going too deep into assaults but vtrs and stalkers will dominate, especially the misery with the ballistic hardpoint and dragonslayer with the superior weapon convergence. (ballistic & energy), HGN733 would be a decent missile boat (never understood why people prefer stalkers and btrs) Atlai will pretty much stay the same.
I told you some heromechs would need changes. The Firebrand when it was originally released actually had no endo steel, and 6.5 tons of Ferro armor when originally released which is 232 points of armor. (identical to the Jagermech DD who also has 232 points of ferro). Ferro is covered as an armor-enhancing thing in that concept. 6.5 tons of armor in standard armor would bring you to 208, so while slightly above the Jager S it's nothing near "overpowered." The Jager S in turn can slap on Ferro and reach 216 points of armor. I even have the Firebrand on old videos, look up Stock Firebrand Kon on youtube. That mech's stock loadout changed since it came out. We just revert it back and the pay to win is gone.
I've used the 4 UAC/5 Jager which uses 192 points of armor, and have gone through matches with 1 to 6 kills and lots of damage, some without getting a scratch. What it changes is quite simply this:
Quote
Designed as an anti-aircraft platform and long-range fire support unit, the JagerMech was intended to correct several perceived faults of the original Rifleman. While it does address the Rifleman's heat issues and limited ammunition, it does so at the cost of significant armor protection. Carrying only a miserly six tons of standard armor, the JagerMech is very vulnerable to return fire. In its favor, the long range of its autocannons, combined with the excellent GarretD2jtargeting and tracking system (made famous by the Rifleman), make it a prime choice for anti-aircraft work. The range of its autocannons also allow it to engage many enemies without suffering return fire, and when stationary it is able to fire all its weapons without heat build-up.
In other words, it'd be used as fire support at long range (like the old 6 AC/2 Jagers that also had 232 points of armor or less yet were so "OP" that they had to get HUGE ghost heat nerfs.) As a Jagermech, you'd have a need -- like in closed and early open beta -- to ask for escorts. You'll be requesting the help of other players. This builds community, teamwork, etc.
Now, mind you the armor concept if you actually read it lets you add 2 to 3 tons extra armor to every mech. So instead of 192, your max is (2 tons standard) 256, 2 tons Ferro (288), or 3 tons standard (288) or 3 tons ferro (324). Nothing says you're stuck at stock.
Hitboxes can always be updated. They are in fact, overdue for some massive overhauls from an overhaul project that paused in December.
Cataphract 3D, why would it be useless? Have you looked at its armor? Played with stock armor? At 352 it works perfectly well. Or you can buff it (with 2 tons limit 416; the most armored Thunderbolt's stock, 2 tons ferro 468 or with 3 tons 448 standard or 504). So incredible buff even for the 3D. What are you complaining about? Why is it useless?
It's just that the Muromets and the 4X will have more. The 4X is registered as having a half ton more armor than it can possibly fit, so it'd be above the Muromets by half a ton (that's an additional 16 points; since it already has 2 of those it'd be 14 more points).
Everything, literally, gets buffed. Some just dont' get "as high" as they used to. Some get higher. Just if you want to achieve higher, you gotta sacrifice 14 slots to Ferro armor.
For one, on the Dragon topic, note that "standard armor" helps the mech, ferro cuts your limit back as a stock thingy as removing it hurts what you've got. We're use the Dragon with the weakest armor, the 5N. It has the greatest firepower too, mind you. 320 points. This'll also cover catapults and Hunchbacks. That's 10 tons of armor. + 2 and you get 12, or +3 and you get 13. Either way.. 2 tons = 384 std to 432 (stalker armor) ferro. 3 tons = 416 std (thunderbolt armor) to 468 (better than cataphracts currently have).
Here's the hitboxes for Dragons.
And here's a Dragon rushing a 4 AC/5 Cataphract with pure red CT and no armor, and then killing the Cataphract.
The Dragons get more armor than they can currently equip, and it's already that dangerous. ;
Catapult hitboxes...
There's your hitbox.
A Jester has 400 points of armor.
An A1 has 384.
A C1 has 320. (C1 is the meta, twin PPCs + jump; only thing better is the Jester I admit).
C4 has 320.
K2 has 352.
C1 and C4 are meant to be long range support. It's characteristic. K2 is a brawler. A1 has ammunition limits and will never be as fast as the others.
The Jester is an exception, but even that is achieved with great sacrifice. Worse comes to worse we can adjust armor for it or slow it down. But honestly the thing's a piece of dirt.
But you think a Catapult is easy to kill as it is?
Here's a Catapult with 126 points of armor. That is LESS than a Locust. Watch it tank.
And here's how to build it.
And here it is recently.
Dragon Slayer isn't even remotely canon and would need to be cut back. I told you there were heroes that need adjustment because PGI designed them. We know how terrible PGI's balancing is.
The SHK 5M has the armor of the Centurion AL, and it's on par with the WEAKEST Griffin, Kintaro, and Wolverine builds in terms of armor. It's also got horrific hardpoints for a Shadowhawk. Will it become a meta of sorts? Probably. But it will be a different meta that focuses more on speed or sniping instead of brawling, as will all Shadowhawks.
The Raven 3-L is the weakest armored Raven. Just to mention it. Note that all mechs would get speed adjustments. Jenners would be among the fastest lights; and the hottest Jenner (the F) has the most armor. The other Jenners which run cooler and perform quite well as anti-lights would never want to worry about overheating, and rebuild accordingly.
Firestarters? Instead of top dogs, they become middle ground. Ravens 2X and 4X are superior to every Firestarter in terms of armor, as is the Huginn. In general they'd all be revamped a bit too, as every firestarter and Raven is slower than the Jenners.
The Commandos are as fast as Jenners at stock and will continue to be. Their superiority extends to their arm range and missile abilities as well as their superior turning. It makes up for their twist. However being 35 tonners, Jenners typically have significantly more structure health than 25 tonners; much more structure health than armor. With the ROFLpult you can see how well that works. Jenners would also need a revamp in hit boxes because this is inexcusable, PGI.
Locusts, they got an armor buff. Big one at that. They also have the fastest speed after the engine limit make over. Faster than Fleas (except when Fleas use MASC). Their drawback is total lack of any real firepower or weight to use much; they can't even do full armor if they want full speed. So it's all about how you build it.
Now.. Cicadas -- big thing right? Armor of a Locust or Commando. Very bad, right? Not so! As with all 40 tonners, its structure is 137 + the 6 points added to the cockpit on every mech so 143 + 96 or 128. Still not great at stock but you also get the 2 or 3 additional tons as your new max (192 at 2 tons std, 216 ferro; higher with 3 tons if we go that route). So, you think that's bad? What about stock speed? 129.6 kph; identical to the Locust! Scary, isn't it? Cicadas would actually be useful, despite the huge armor hit they take. God knows they could never use max armor without losing speed anyway.
Now, think a BJ will outdo a Centurion? There's a huge difference in structure health, plus only 2 Centurions have identical armor to BJs, one has superior armor. One of the identical armors has superior speed. And the last, superior firepower and use even with a standard engine. Then there's the AC/20 Wang, and the AC/20 CN9-AH which needs to make its return.
Hunchbacks are the perfect middle ground so to speak. But they would all slow down (as would most mechs, while some speed up). In the end, what we have is a more diverse game where the meta will change into many different directions depending on preferences, as none of the current metas would work the same way anymore.
On a slight side note: Victors will dominate in firepower. But have the weakest armor.
Stalkers tank pretty well, but they have the second lowest armor of all current assault mechs. They are weapons platforms, slow ones at that. Support mechs. Battlemasters outdo them in quite a bit of things. Banshees and Atlases will be tanks, and Highlanders something of a middle ground.
2
;
