300 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

Quote

If you want to balance some jump sniping just add the randomness you get firing when jumping to when you are falling too.

I dont see jump sniping as being the problem though. The problem is pinpoint damage. If you remove pinpoint damage there is no longer anything overpowered about jump sniping at all. Adding randomness to jumpsniping is just treating the symptoms rather than the actual illness. Plus it adds awful RNG to a game that simply should not have any RNG.

Besides I dont want to eliminate jump sniping as a viable playstyle. Adding reticle shake while falling would completely eliminate jump sniping. I like having jump snipers in the game and I think they perform a vital role. But the reality is the current level of pinpoint damage makes jump snipers way too good. Pinpoint damage has to be lowered so jump snipers no longer completely dominate.

Lastly remember we have mechs like the Daishi coming out that can equip 3 Gauss Rifles and an ERPPC and do 55+ pinpoint damage. I think it's fairly self-explanatory why pinpoint damage needs to be lowered on Gauss/PPCs. I suppose you could balance Gauss with ghost heat but I would much prefer to get the weapon balance to a state where Ghost heat is no longer required.

Edited by Khobai, 01 June 2014 - 12:55 AM.

[Elkfire]

I know it's been reiterated countless times, but I really think giving PPCs the arcing mechanic and making all autocannons (not just Clan models) burst-fire would go a long way towards dealing with FLD weapons (and mech variants that make the best use of them with jumpjets and properly aligned hardpoints) obsoleting everything else.

And then maybe people would actually use the Gauss again! At least that would be a little trickier to poptart with. But regardless, I'd at least like to see the previously mentioned mechanics tried out, if nothing else.

[Av4tar]

Remove #linking target.

[DEFENSETURRET]

Peekaboo I C JU, on 27 May 2014 - 06:04 PM, said:

I can predict a whole lot of people leaving...I personally will have to delete mech I paid $$ for the skins for and all the time I vested into them, this is why I no longer spend here...every time someone cries it cost me bookoo hours of hard grinding and actual cash...because if a mech no longer fills a role..it is gone, no questions asked...plus the skins i pay for that I don't get the mc back....ya...starting to hate this game

Or you could spend that money on mechbays and just put the ones you already have in storage, while you go get another one and... I dunno... ADAPT.

[DEFENSETURRET]

Mister Blastman, on 28 May 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

All I ever here is PPCs, everwhere.

Counters? Sure. Take PPCs and ACs, yourself. (and hope you have three other competent pilots on teamspeak to do it with).

That's life at high Elo.

I admit... I spend plenty of time taking joke builds, regardless. It is too easy for me to use sniper 'mechs. It gets boring after a while.

You hit the nail on the head. This is a problem that every customizable game runs into. Card games run into it, tabletop games run into it, and video games where you can change what you bring into battle run into it.

Take Magic: The Gathering for example. When the set "Mirrodin" was released, there were all sorts of viable decks being used in competitive play. Tribal Goblins, Tribal Elves, Broodstar Affinity, White Weenie, R/G Beats, Red Deck Wins, etc etc etc.

Then "Darksteel" was released. It included a card named "Arcbound Ravager." Now, Arcbound Ravager was not insanely powerful on its own... but it exploited the rampant availability of cheap fuel for its combat tricks, and combined with things like Disciple of the Vault to do massive damage directly to the opponent that couldn't be stopped by blocking or killing the creature, and Skullclamp to constantly draw a fresh supply of new cards whenever you used Ravager's core mechanic. This meant that it couldn't be stopped with control, combos couldn't go off before being killed, and even other aggro decks were incapable of racing it to the finish line.

So that massively diverse metagame at competitive levels quickly became "Play Ravager Affinity, or play massive artifact hate so that Ravager Affinity won't kill you in 4 turns or less."

That's boring. It was killing the game. People were leaving in droves. So what did WotC do? They banned Disciple. It wasn't enough. They banned Skullclamp. It still wasn't enough. They eventually ended up just banning Ravager itself, right before it rotated out of Standard play (it become a whole other headache in Extended, but that's beside the point.)

When the competitive level of your game becomes a stale this-or-that metagame, you need to fix it, pronto. If you don't, people leave... and it's damn hard to get a player back after they ragequit your game entirely.

[Black Ivan]

Well said Defenseturret

[DEFENSETURRET]

elitewolverine, on 28 May 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:

The Panther is one very viable jump sniping mech, and yes even in lore/tt

"Their first large-scale use by Kurita warriors came during the First Succession War in the battle for Quentin, when the 2nd Legion of Vega used their Panthers to severely maul the slower, heavier 'Mechs of the 42nd Avalon Hussars while avoiding return fire."

In the TT you can jump snipe idea since it is a turn based representation...


"If anyone ever worried whether Ahrmram would be able to keep up with the flow of battle in such a small 'Mech, they don't any longer. It is the colonel's command group that has to keep up with him as he jumps from front to front keeping personal tabs on the battle and participating, if necessary. More than once, Ahrmram's gunnery skill has helped turn the tide of battle."

These are examples of jump sniping in TT/Lore

No, they're not. They're examples of jumping and sniping. Not jumpsniping.

In TT, there are phases to your turn. You move. Your opponent moves. You shoot. Your opponent shoots. The shots are calculated based on where the shooter and target are AFTER MOVEMENT IS COMPLETE. This means that the Panther, which you're so obsessed with, would jump on top of a building. Land. Aim. Fire.

It's completely different.

Black Ivan, on 01 June 2014 - 01:56 AM, said:

Well said Defenseturret

Oh damn, I completely forgot that I was logged into this account. This is my all-urbanmech alt account.

Switching to StillRadioactive.

[StillRadioactive]

DEFENSETURRET, on 01 June 2014 - 02:04 AM, said:

No, they're not. They're examples of jumping and sniping. Not jumpsniping.

In TT, there are phases to your turn. You move. Your opponent moves. You shoot. Your opponent shoots. The shots are calculated based on where the shooter and target are AFTER MOVEMENT IS COMPLETE. This means that the Panther, which you're so obsessed with, would jump on top of a building. Land. Aim. Fire.

It's completely different.



Oh damn, I completely forgot that I was logged into this account. This is my all-urbanmech alt account.

Switching to StillRadioactive.

Ahh, that's better.

[Kh0rn]

Adapt the jump jets from Living Legends where it was a jump instead of a hover, you Generated a lot of heat and the the target system took a long time too line up.

[Rex Budman]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 May 2014 - 05:48 PM, said:

Take an already existing mechanic to fix it.

We have Cockpit/Reticle Shake on the "Up-Jump". What is so hard about extending that Shake into the first .3-1.0 second of the "Down-Jump"?

Sympathetic vibrations don't end the moment the thrust does. Ain't how physics work. What it does though, is force the Jumper to Jump Higher, thus exposing more of their mech, for a longer time, to be able to have that same shot window as before. This instantly impact the Risk/Reward Ratio, and makes it much less the no-brainer tactic it currently is, while also increasing the required skill curve to use it effectively.

Thus, the tactic remains viable, but it would largely disappear in lower Elo Tiers, and even in upper Elos, the R/Rr is not so strong as to make it the mandatory Meta it is right now.

And if it were combined with the proposal to correctly scale leg damage to mass, non JJ cushioned landings? This would cause them to actually mount full JJs (or close to) to have enough thrust to get the shot AND land without breaking their legs. Not to mention the braking thrust would increase the shot window against them, potentially, also.


Thoughts?

If you're trying to keep it realistic based on physics then you would need more data on how the mechs gyro's absorbed the shock. Still though, it is a good idea to keep the shake going on a little longer but this won't help alleviate matters, imo. It will hinder a little, but easily worked around.

Or perhaps one go could really over the top and extend the vibration extensively but add a module to combat it or at the stat to the improved gyro module. This would be fun by having the reduced shake when using that module because it would really make a sniper build useless with out it and adds more focus to the build/role.

So, not a bad idea if you implement the module improvements.

[Chavette]

Todd Lightbringer, on 27 May 2014 - 05:46 PM, said:

Disabling weapons while in the air, along with several other ideas have been brought up on Twitter, and the devs said they would be putting something in for the next patch. What it is I've not the slightest idea, but I guess we'll see next week.

Good. Just in time for SC and enough for me to not miss this mess.

[Jun Watarase]

Quote

When the competitive level of your game becomes a stale this-or-that metagame, you need to fix it, pronto. If you don't, people leave... and it's damn hard to get a player back after they ragequit your game entirely.

Unfortunately many "competitive" players dont want the meta to be improved because then their i-win button gets taken away from them.

Right now since a metabuild has a 100% chance of killing a non metabuild (all other factors being equal), they want it to stay that way since they have a massive advantage over anyone not using a metabuild.

The fact that it means most of the options in the game are not viable doesnt concern them, since the only thing they care about is winning and stats. They are perfectly fine with using the same build for hundreds of matches. Infact they would greatly prefer if all other options remain non viable since it means that it make sit easier for them to stomp anyone not using a metabuild.

They then claim that anyone wanting the game to be balanced so that all options are viable are scrubs that need to learn2play and they cant adapt by using metabuilds.

Unfortunately these people also spend a lot of money on the game...guess who PGI listens to?

We saw the exact same thing happen when people asked for decent matchmaking and these same people spammed the forums with "learn2play!!! buy a mic!!! use voice chat!!! join a unit!!!" while they continued to drop in 8 man premades vs randoms, which let them maintain a near 100% win ratio with no effort. When the ability to drop in 8 man groups was taken away from them, they bitched and moaned about how it was SO UNFAIR to them and that noobs should stop complaining and learn to use teamwork like what they, the "pro players" were doing. When PGI gave them a 12 man queue just for them, they refused to use it and found a way to sync drop vs randoms by using incompatible weight classes and launching at the same time, which allowed them to play matches of 8-12 premade players vs a team of mostly randoms, to predictable results.

Only relatively recently did PGI decide to limit premades to 1 per team, after more than a year of pointless curb stomping and thousands of players who quit MWO and refused to touch it again. And we STILL got a lot of bitching and moaning about how the "pro players" were being penalized for "using teamwork" and how they weren't able to sync drop vs randoms anymore and it was just so unfair to them....

[Bishop Steiner]

Rex Budman, on 01 June 2014 - 02:10 AM, said:

If you're trying to keep it realistic based on physics then you would need more data on how the mechs gyro's absorbed the shock. Still though, it is a good idea to keep the shake going on a little longer but this won't help alleviate matters, imo. It will hinder a little, but easily worked around.

Or perhaps one go could really over the top and extend the vibration extensively but add a module to combat it or at the stat to the improved gyro module. This would be fun by having the reduced shake when using that module because it would really make a sniper build useless with out it and adds more focus to the build/role.

So, not a bad idea if you implement the module improvements.

Could be an interesting idea. As for the hindrance factor, you may be surprised. The really good jump snipers use a tiny window. Forcing anywhere from 1/3 to a full second longer into their jump may seem minor, and of course would need playtesting, but it would significantly change their exposure, and thus how much counterfire is encountered, and all of it would be inbound BEFORE they get their shot off. So they may also be dealing with weaponfire shake.

Since they have decided to indeed add the scaling leg damage, it is going to force some changes. Especially on the Highlander, as just to clear enough to shoot they may need to add another JJ. And then to have enough thrust to not take leg damage? (which will also keep them exposed a tiny bit longer) possibly another. 2-4 tons being forced onto Cataphracts - Highlanders starts to eat into the precious minmax optimization.

The previous ideas all nerfed mechanics that were of little consequence to the jump sniper, and the heat proposal would have been in the same group. These actually hit home where it hurts, without unilaterally hurting brawlers even more, as opposed to Paul's previous nerfs.

The hard part would be in tuning things so as to reduce the efficacy of jumpsniping without totally ruining and eliminating a valid tactic. Of course, many self proclaimed L33Ts will cry that it is in fact dead, but then the truly good players will still do it, and prove the lie to the claim and those players skill. They will just hopefully do less often and effectively, which is the whole goal, to balance the metas.

[StillRadioactive]

Bishop Steiner, on 01 June 2014 - 04:49 AM, said:

Could be an interesting idea. As for the hindrance factor, you may be surprised. The really good jump snipers use a tiny window. Forcing anywhere from 1/3 to a full second longer into their jump may seem minor, and of course would need playtesting, but it would significantly change their exposure, and thus how much counterfire is encountered, and all of it would be inbound BEFORE they get their shot off. So they may also be dealing with weaponfire shake.

Since they have decided to indeed add the scaling leg damage, it is going to force some changes. Especially on the Highlander, as just to clear enough to shoot they may need to add another JJ. And then to have enough thrust to not take leg damage? (which will also keep them exposed a tiny bit longer) possibly another. 2-4 tons being forced onto Cataphracts - Highlanders starts to eat into the precious minmax optimization.

The previous ideas all nerfed mechanics that were of little consequence to the jump sniper, and the heat proposal would have been in the same group. These actually hit home where it hurts, without unilaterally hurting brawlers even more, as opposed to Paul's previous nerfs.

The hard part would be in tuning things so as to reduce the efficacy of jumpsniping without totally ruining and eliminating a valid tactic. Of course, many self proclaimed L33Ts will cry that it is in fact dead, but then the truly good players will still do it, and prove the lie to the claim and those players skill. They will just hopefully do less often and effectively, which is the whole goal, to balance the metas.

And therein lies the difference between the truly comp-quality players and the tryhards. The comp-quality players will take whatever changes are made, and they'll roll with it. They'll stop making 12-mans of 8 jumpsnipers and 4 lights, and they'll start making 12-mans of 3 assault brawlers, 3 jumpsnipers, 3 quick strikers and 3 lights... or whatever other combination works for the specific tonnage limit, map and game mode settings their next round of competition requires.

The tryhards, on the other hand, will rage about their precious easy-button being taken away, and they'll drop out of the competitive leagues... either through rage-quits or just plain obsolescence.

I fully believe that 75% (or more) of the comp community will roll with the punches and prove that they're worthy of being there. The other 25% (or fewer) will out themselves as tryhards and get dropped. Meanwhile, dedicated Medium pilots, dedicated brawlers and skilled jacks-of-all-trades will fill their spots. Life will go on, and the game will be better.

Besides, I'd truly love to see the day when drop decks that work in TT actually work here. Personally, I'm a fan of super-stock builds, where the weapons are pretty much the same but the maneuverability has been enhanced. Mobs of Centurions with 2xLRM-5, 2xML, LB/10-X and a massive engine would be great in a comp scene where the various tactics are truly balanced.

[Mcgral18]

L e 0, on 31 May 2014 - 11:58 PM, said:

They are not? it is a serious and worrying misconception about pop tarting. Brawling is actually stronger don't believe me then go watch the tourney matches and tell me the bulk weapon system across the drop deck is not medium lasers and ac20s with any team that placed high forcing down a push (after dropping arty) and then a 100m brawl ranged is good only in a pug game where there is no coordination and a skilled player can stay in the backline unchallenged and pick people off more JJ nerfs and ranged nerfs would be horrible for the game. Brawling is not a dog fight or advanced tactic the games paced to slow for that a brawl is simply finding a opportunity to break a enemies line and overwhelming it and then choosing targets as you go.

And guess which weapons do that best? Not SRMs. AC20 is used because it has the highest FLD ( which it isn't supposed to) and it still has an effective range of around 500M before it isn't worth the damage.

Other brawling weapons include MLs for their wonderful tonnage to damage to heat ratio. Mid range ACs are another go to choice, since they can both pop and brawl.

PGI doesn't want short range weapons to beat long range weapons when they get close. Why do they have the same recycle? Why do the long range weapons have a more favourable damage application? Because PGI doesn't want balance.

[P e n u m b r a]

you guys watched the tourney right? its all pushing with medium lasers and acs?? and what are you talking about srms are getting buffed as well as JJs getting nerfed. So a buff for close range and a nerf for long, when the most efficient way to play is all ready to force a brawl. Fast engines to push etc, most the people crying are completely clueless. Short range is utter trash in a game as slow paced as this it is NOT a close range mad dogfight you imagine it to be like in your table top or books your read. you guys wont stop until you can run in the open without consequence and get right into their face. 500m is not really far enough distance to deny 12 mechs rolling in anyway we are almost at that point where you can charge in without worry and just chain pick and roll through targets.

The problem here really is that brawling is overpowered for team matches and jump sniping in open pugs.

Edited by L e 0, 01 June 2014 - 10:39 AM.

[WhoDidTheElf]

Koniving, on 31 May 2014 - 06:29 PM, said:

Reducing the rate of fire for FLD weapons won't do much. If you isolate it to heavier autocannons, all you've created is another reason to make them meta.

Lets say you reduce the firing rate of an AC/20 to twice per 10 seconds. Once every 6 seconds for example. So 0 and 6 are your firing times. You've reduced it to 40 damage.
The PPC? You just reduced that to 20 damage in 10 seconds.
The Clan ER PPC? 30 damage.
The Gauss Rifle? 15 damage (it was already having trouble).

You just made the most powerful weapon available in our time line completely worthless.

Also the AC/10 outperforms the AC/20. That's bad. Even if you do reduce it as well, the AC/10 will be better than the PPC even then when in lore it is not. Not to mention inferior range.

I don't get how it would make it "more meta" than it can already be? If all of the comp players already roll with AC's then how can it get "more" meta? If anything it would make a window for more tactical movements, actually creating that "thinking man's FPS" that they talk about...

The AC/10 would obviously need to have it's CD adjusted to account for the AC/20.

Roll up on a DDC with an AC/20 and some SRM's and you would really have one heck of a mean mech there. It would still do 20 damage, pin point, and all front loaded. That FLD AC/20 is a huge plus, it will just do it far less often, giving time for mechs to actually "brawl" and move around in the fight instead of face hugging each other.

As for the Gauss being worthless. I'd say if you let it keep it's 3x range and extreme speed, it would fill its niche roll quite well. That is as an extreme range engagement tool with pin point accuracy.

Mavairo, on 31 May 2014 - 05:45 PM, said:

It is the front loaded damage. There is far far too little opportunity cost to run ACs as FLD weapons. Opp cost in this game is Heat, Weight or Damage. There is absolutely zero true trade off given how useless other weapons are compared to the AC. This comes to the fact that they are zero heat or near zero, while providing massive damage in return. That they are near zero heat means, their Obvious large weight becomes largely a non factor, since you do not have to try to keep a mech that runs heavy on ACs cool at all. Where as every laser in this game has a very large heat tax that requires you to fit a disproportionate number of heat sinks to cool the mech off and "sustain" fire.

You always said, though, "for their FLD" as if to qualify it by saying if they had either A, B or C, then no one would care about the FLD. Which is why I proposed my change to the CD to remedy C.

[P e n u m b r a]

So you want mechs to be able to survive longer with "ranged" weapons having a 500m optimal range to down 12 mechs charging in with fast engines using the terrain correctly. As ranged you will down perhaps one mech before they are on top of you and you are overheating once they break that front line it is so much easier for them the brawling team to choose targets and chain swarm through your entire team and wreak you. It is not even fun like I said its slow paced it is not a dogfight you pretty much roll in and pinata gank singled out mechs....

Edited by L e 0, 01 June 2014 - 10:51 AM.

[Aresye]

WhoDidTheElf, on 01 June 2014 - 10:37 AM, said:

I don't get how it would make it "more meta" than it can already be? If all of the comp players already roll with AC's then how can it get "more" meta? If anything it would make a window for more tactical movements, actually creating that "thinking man's FPS" that they talk about...

The meta is efficient but it's not the I-Win button that a lot of people claim it is (especially for competitive play).

Take for example this most recent 12-man tournament. I think it's fair to say that nearly every single team except a couple took mostly all meta builds, but the main deciding factor for which team won wasn't in the builds themselves.

Often one team made a positioning or movement error. The other team exploited that error, got a couple kills to gain the numbers advantage, and then proceeded to win the match from the ensuing snowball effect.

Stop focusing on the builds themselves and watch how these top competitive teams actually play. Changing the meta and/or nerfing jump sniping into non-existence is not going to stop SJR or LORDS from being good.

[Elkfire]

Aresye, on 01 June 2014 - 11:04 AM, said:

The meta is efficient but it's not the I-Win button that a lot of people claim it is (especially for competitive play).

Take for example this most recent 12-man tournament. I think it's fair to say that nearly every single team except a couple took mostly all meta builds, but the main deciding factor for which team won wasn't in the builds themselves.

Often one team made a positioning or movement error. The other team exploited that error, got a couple kills to gain the numbers advantage, and then proceeded to win the match from the ensuing snowball effect.

Stop focusing on the builds themselves and watch how these top competitive teams actually play. Changing the meta and/or nerfing jump sniping into non-existence is not going to stop SJR or LORDS from being good.

I think you're missing the point. The point is that there are more weapons in the game than PPCs and Autocannons, and it would be nice if those other weapons weren't rendered mostly obsolete (or at least at a significant disadvantage) due to not having the same FLD mechanics.

Edited by Elkfire, 01 June 2014 - 11:19 AM.