510 replies to this topic

[General Taskeen]

Here is my feedback:

Jumpjets are also great for maneuvering even if your Mech was originally standing still in order to jump in any direction in TT.

A Jenner with 5 JJ's in MWO goes 25m from a standstill, which is incorrect. Based on players choice of direction on a gridmap, it should be 150m. In other words, certain Mechs could fly around if need be. Its why the Panther has Jump Jets to offset its slow speed to quickly disengage for a movement turn.

Thus in MWO JJ's don't actually behave really at all how they should as far as maneuverability goes. The only programming currently "in" MWO JJ's is "Float," and thus "poptarting" is their main use.

If you want to "fix" Jump Jets PGI, then they need to have better functionality added that allows for other tactical uses they are supposed to be capable of.

For instance, imagine these scenarios of better picturing how JJ's could work in real-time from their TT function:

Jenner at 0km/h + Jump = Slight upward thrust ('Poptart")
Jenner at 0km/h + Hold A + Jump and hold for full fuel burn = Jump Left, instantly going to the rated Cruising Speed MP (75km/h) in a low trajectory landing 150m from starting position.
Jenner at Full Speed + Suddenly Hold S + Jump = Immediately Jump Backwards, instantly at rated Cruising Speed MP (75km/h) in a low trajectory landing 150m from starting position.
Jenner at 0km/h + Jump (Half Fuel Burn) + Hold W = Slight upward thrust ("poptart"), remaining jump fuel used to immediately thrust forward 75m.

[Felio]

Bloodweaver, on 08 July 2014 - 03:54 PM, said:

But the ratios are there regardless, and it does look like you need 6 or more jets to get twice the height of 1. How is this different from what we have already?
So in other words, each jump jet you add is going to give less lift than the one before it? EVEN MORE SO than it already does?

So instead of people using 1 JJ because it's all they need, they'll use 1 JJ because adding a second is a waste of tonnage/space.

/golfclap

[Deathlike]

Should I be reading into this that 1 JJ is still preferable, or that jump height with more JJs has diminishing returns?

Because... it doesn't really solve that 1 JJ vs more than 1 JJ dilemma.

Sometimes, I wonder why the logic is not thought through...

[Naduk]

looking forward to seeing how these changes play out

[MourningZero]

Why does everyone say pop-tarting is a 'valid' tactic? It's not in TT, not in the canon, doesn't make any sense for the universe, and isn't particularly good for the game. I get that it existed in previous MW titles for probably the same (possibly lazy) reasons it exists here, but those games had a lot less terrain to amplify the issue.

Wishlist:
Implement crouch/prone so we can do the TT/canon ridge hump in any mech (make animation decently long and be stuck stationary while doing it = tradeoff), and add mild crosshair jiggle for the entire airtime of a jump.

Then you can make JJs actually good for what they are supposed to be doing - getting around.

[Ryvucz]

Just for a future April Fool's joke, make jumpjets as effective as they were in closed beta for a day.

No one should be able to hit anything their first few matches.

But as for the changes... see what happens I guess.

[Joseph Mallan]

Quote

Table Top (TT) rules add 3 heat instantaneously upon using any number of Jump Jets.

IIRC Jump Jets added +1 heat per Jet minimum of +3 heat. So The Spider's 8 Jets added +8 heat if the full distance was jumped and +3 if only one hex.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 08 July 2014 - 05:32 PM.

[Cimarb]

I just do not get it. You should benefit from taking more than one jump jet, but that graph shows that it takes EIGHT jump jets to double the thrust of the first jet....

I know lots of people have already said it, but I just do not understand the logic behind that...

[TheSteelRhino]

It would have been helpful to use some mechs as examples. We have a graph with no values in it?

It looks like you still want at least 1 JJ for maneuverability, but then after than the return on investment doesn't seem very good. Again, something that illustrated just what you got.

Example: Same graph but populated with data for the following:

35 tons
55 tons
70 tons
90 tons

I actually question the ability of 1 jumpjet to even get your mech off the ground as much as this chart seems to indicate. 9.8m/s squared downward acceleration at 1 standard gravity is a pretty powerful force.
I really think that 1 JJ should barely be able to neutralize the effects of gravity. 2 or 3 jumpjets should really be needed to make jumpjets worth installing and for handling terrain.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

OK, we've been waiting for this for a while (ever since the Highlander's jump jets got whacked with the nerf bat), and, frankly, it's about damn time. I haven't read any of the previous feedback (yet), so if any of this is redundant, get over it.


... it is very important to remember that Jump Jets are for maneuvering purposes only and not meant to make a 'Mech fly around the environment.
- This is a key point and should be remembered. As long as I am still able to occasionally jump up over vertical obstacles, occasionally jump to clear across narrow canyons, and skip turn (use JJs to quickly change direction), I'm happy.

First: Jump Jet Heat.
- I am moderately concerned about the possibility of shutting down at the worst time in a brawl on a veryr hot map, but this should be manageable.

Second: Jump Jet Thrust

Jump Jet's are now doing much less compounded lift than before.
- Good.

The initial boost is also providing less vertical lift than before.
- Good.

The combination of Fall Damage, Jump Jet Heat, Jump Jet Thrust changes culminate into a change in gameplay dynamics in keeping 'Mechs feeling heavy and more tank-like.
- It seems like this will change the "feel of the game" significantly, and probably for the better.

One common misconception that I've seen concerning these changes is that this was supposed to "fix" the "pop-tart meta". That is not the case. Just to be clear, we are not trying to remove pop-tarting from MWO. It is a valid, tactical means of play. The way we want to address it is from a cost per performance view, not eliminate it. The changes in this update do affect the pop-tart meta builds but only by increasing costs in tonnage, space and having to adapt to less vertical thrust.
- I am eager to test out these changes, to see how much different it is to jump a similar height, especially in a CTF, TBR, and VTR with one or max jump jets.

Addendum 2: The graph is only to represent the fact that both Heat and Thrust get a base initial value with a linear climb with each additional jump jet. The amount of lift you get is based on Chassis Weight and engine size so the graph would have to be stacked with every chassis/engine combination and their respective values making it very hard to read.
- I get that the graph is just a visual representation, but I'm sure you can see how any visual chart or graph without meaningful numbers could be confusing and/or misinterpreted by the players ... particularly those of us who thrive on trying to figure out exactly how these things will work.

I sincerely appreciate the recent and upcoming efforts to shape the game -- many of the changes recently implemented or coming soon^TM are long overdue, but it is good to see them finally arriving. Also, the communications and efforts to keep us informed of these changes continue to improve.

[xWiredx]

Some consideration might want to be given to the maps with this change, as getting around some maps without JJs in their current form can be extremely off-putting. For instance, this could increase the amount of time it takes some mechs to join in battle in a negative way.

I can see this also being a problem with the amount of fall damage implemented, as it now takes more time and more JJ energy to slow a mech's fall.

Really, overall, sometimes you have to think less sim, more arcade with things like this IMO. Balancing things is obviously nice, but this really doesn't appear to have much relevance to keeping the game fun so much as it makes moving around slower and more difficult compared to how things currently are.

This is coming from a guy that doesn't pop-tart, too.

[Joseph Mallan]

Rhinehardt Ritter, on 08 July 2014 - 05:43 PM, said:

It would have been helpful to use some mechs as examples. We have a graph with no values in it?

It looks like you still want at least 1 JJ for maneuverability, but then after than the return on investment doesn't seem very good. Again, something that illustrated just what you got.

Example: Same graph but populated with data for the following:

35 tons
55 tons
70 tons
90 tons

I actually question the ability of 1 jumpjet to even get your mech off the ground as much as this chart seems to indicate. 9.8m/s squared downward acceleration at 1 standard gravity is a pretty powerful force.
I really think that 1 JJ should barely be able to neutralize the effects of gravity. 2 or 3 jumpjets should really be needed to make jumpjets worth installing and for handling terrain.

One Jump Jet was able to lift a Mech one Level. Or half a (Average) Mech height. So 6-10m... Give or take.

[Cimarb]

Kageru Ikazuchi, on 08 July 2014 - 05:44 PM, said:

Jump Jet's are now doing much less compounded lift than before.
- Good.

The initial boost is also providing less vertical lift than before.
- Good.


Addendum 2: The graph is only to represent the fact that both Heat and Thrust get a base initial value with a linear climb with each additional jump jet. The amount of lift you get is based on Chassis Weight and engine size so the graph would have to be stacked with every chassis/engine combination and their respective values making it very hard to read.
- I get that the graph is just a visual representation, but I'm sure you can see how any visual chart or graph without meaningful numbers could be confusing and/or misinterpreted by the players ... particularly those of us who thrive on trying to figure out exactly how these things will work.

I sincerely appreciate the recent and upcoming efforts to shape the game -- many of the changes recently implemented or coming soon^TM are long overdue, but it is good to see them finally arriving. Also, the communications and efforts to keep us informed of these changes continue to improve.

Jump Jets SHOULD give compounded lift. You should get MORE use out of MORE jets, and in fact I think it should be exponential more than linear.

On top of that, if you look at the chart, the first jet gives X amount of thrust. To get 2X (twice the trust of the first jet), you have to equip EIGHT, yes, "8", jump jets. Very few mechs can even mount that many jump jets, so every mech in game will benefit more from 1 jet than they will from any additional jets after that.

As you said in your Addendum 2, though, we could be completely misunderstanding that graph. We really need some specific examples...

[Asmudius Heng]

I would prefer reticule shake for the entire jump but give directional jump jets.

Mobility+ for all Chassis but makes the pop tarts much less accurate.

But that's never going to happen really so I will take whatever I can get to change the meta at this point.

Jump sniping or pop tarting etc ARE viable tactics IMO, but the ease of targeting while in the air is still what makes it so good.
The more you nerf mobility without touching accuracy the more you encourage JJ use for that single purpose.

I do hope that the combination of fall damage and needing more JJs to get up higher means that the period of fully accurate floating at the apex will be reduced making it a more difficult move to pull off. However I just do not know if this and the small additional heat (SHS ... really? no on uses those) will really curb the power of jump sniping to any reasonable degree.

I want my JJ mech to be able to be much more mobile in other directions not just up and forward.

EDIT: Just to clarify, I agree with making the mechs jumping feel more heavy as Paul stated, when I mean more mobile in terms of OPTIONS not speed/power etc

Edited by Asmudius Heng, 08 July 2014 - 06:04 PM.

[Chopsaw]

Quote

Again, it is very important to remember that Jump Jets are for maneuvering purposes only and not meant to make a 'Mech fly around the environment.

OK, great...glad that is established. When I use my five JJ's on my little 35 ton jenner, I want to maneuver, not lift off like the figgin' space shuttle. Maneuvering means that I could actually avoid fire, not become the perfect floating target. Seriously, light mechs using JJ's is a death sentence.

Quote

Jumping makes a 'Mech harder to hit, but the accuracy of weapons fitted to the jumping 'Mech is also adversely affected -battletech wiki

Please explain to me how the current implementation and planned changes address the "being harder to hit" part of this?

[Hastur Azargo]

Dear PGI, poptarting isn't the problem, pinpoint damage is. I wonder if you're eventually going to crack down on that "multiple weapons hitting the same location instantaneously, although that wasn't the case in TT" thingy. Now that would be wonderful. And then all the poptarts are welcome to stay, once they can't hit you with 3-4 very hard-hitting weapons to the same exact pixel on your mech.

[Shredhead]

You want to incentivize people to take more jump jets. Why does your graph not look like this?

Nobody in his right mind will ever use more than five JJs, it's just not worth it. Your approach will still benefit use of 2-3 jumpjets. If you use the same graph I propose for both lift and height, it should be enough.

Edited by Shredhead, 08 July 2014 - 07:19 PM.

[Void Angel]

Sandpit, on 08 July 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

first and foremost, there's more than one "remove poptarts" threads and posts in THIS thread

secondly, show me ANYWHERE that I attacked yours or anyone else's ability to be "good enough".
I pointed out that that is NOT a reason to judge somethign as "op" or to say something needs to be "fixed"

I can overcome the tactic, countless others have overcome the tactic. So those of us that adapt and learn to adjust tactics don't feel it needs to be "fixed" because that implies we think it's "broken" in the first place.

Just because you feel it is, doesn't make it so is my point. You are arguing for YOUR opinion just as you state at the end of your post. Just as everyone else here is. Your opinion is no more valid for anyone else than mine is.

I'm confused by your opening non sequitur. The fact that some loud people do want jump sniping removed has little bearing on our discussion, and you haven't made it clear what you're trying to say. In essence, you've pointed out that water is wet... just out of the blue. I have no idea what this has to do with anything we're discussing, because you haven't told me.

Second, do you review the things you type before hitting "post?" It might be instructive for you:

Sandpit, on 08 July 2014 - 01:53 PM, said:

again, just because you find something in teh game difficult to counter doesn't make it "op" or a validate a reason to remove or "fix" it.

Sandpit, on 08 July 2014 - 02:54 PM, said:

just because you don't like something, think it's too hard to overcome, and/or too common, doesn't mean it should be removed.

Now, to be fair, I may be misinterpreting your statements - you could just be accusing people of laziness. If so, I stand duly corrected.

As for the idea that no one's opinion is valid for anyone else, well... That opinion is wrong. You can tell that it is wrong because it contradicts itself. You are telling me that my argument isn't authoritative, because it's "opinion." But that statement is an argument itself - which by your own usage is "opinion," and therefore not valid for anyone else. So what have you actually succeeded in telling me?

In reality, poptarts have dominated the competitive landscape since the Highlander was introduced. They are not a way to play, but counterable with a certain degree of skill. They are the way to play if you want to win as often as possible - hence, the team compositions of all the top winners of our last tournament. Not only were they all using the same jump sniper tactics, their team comps were nearly identical. They did this because that comp and those tactics gave them the best chance to win - I know they can run other tactics, and rock peoples' world with them. But when the going got tough, the tough drove poptarts. Again, jump sniping isn't an IWIN button; you can learn to play around it to an extent. But the fact that you can still play in other ways does not invalidate the fact that jump sniping yields an assymmetrically large advantage compared to other kinds of gameplay at the moment. That is a problem from a game design standpoint, and it's one that does need "fixed."

Edited by Void Angel, 08 July 2014 - 07:01 PM.

[Heffay]

Cimarb, on 08 July 2014 - 05:41 PM, said:

I just do not get it. You should benefit from taking more than one jump jet, but that graph shows that it takes EIGHT jump jets to double the thrust of the first jet....

I know lots of people have already said it, but I just do not understand the logic behind that...

Well, assume that the engine can only put out a certain amount of JJ thrust.

Dividing the amount of thrust by the number of jump jets doesn't mean that the amount of thrust is magically multiplied by the number of jump jets.

However, through careful engineering with more jump jets you can have incremental improvements on the effective thrust generated by your engine, by tailoring the jet for particular circumstances. So having 2 jump jets can increase your effective thrust by 20% over one jump jet just doing all the thrust.

See? There is a logical explanation for everything.

Azargo, on 08 July 2014 - 06:28 PM, said:

Dear PGI, poptarting isn't the problem, pinpoint damage is.

I think that is exactly what they said. This isn't designed to eliminate pop tarting. This is designed to balance jump jets.

[Void Angel]

Cimarb, on 08 July 2014 - 05:55 PM, said:

Jump Jets SHOULD give compounded lift. You should get MORE use out of MORE jets, and in fact I think it should be exponential more than linear.

On top of that, if you look at the chart, the first jet gives X amount of thrust. To get 2X (twice the trust of the first jet), you have to equip EIGHT, yes, "8", jump jets. Very few mechs can even mount that many jump jets, so every mech in game will benefit more from 1 jet than they will from any additional jets after that.

As you said in your Addendum 2, though, we could be completely misunderstanding that graph. We really need some specific examples...

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__3542465
The chart is purely illustrative, and does not have a direct bearing on game numbers - those numbers will be derived from engine rating, number of jump jets - and probably other factors by the time it hits production.