510 replies to this topic

[Macksheen]

Any chance that, as part of this, we can un-suck the Victor models (besides the DS, which is still being used)?

Also, I'd love to see falling damage scaled a bit - and maybe lessened if a mech is mounting Jump Jets based on the # ... you can even say given all the JJ, the actuators have been adjusted, etc. whatever.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Macksheen, on 13 July 2014 - 05:56 PM, said:

Any chance that, as part of this, we can un-suck the Victor models (besides the DS, which is still being used)?

If your Victors need "un-sucking", you might be using them wrong ...

There are numerous reasons why the VTR-9S, -9B, and -9K are not as good at jump-sniping as the Dragon Slayer, but my -9B and -9S are phenomenal brawlers ... have been for about a year with almost exactly the same build. Depending on how jump jets work on the Victor after the nerf bat (finally) swings, the VTR-9K could possibly have a place (with six jets instead of four, equipped with Gauss, 2xPCC or similar).

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 13 July 2014 - 07:22 PM.

[Void Angel]

YueFei, on 13 July 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

That's a fair point you make about game balance trumping physics, but in this case I think having JJs adhering to physics would help the gameplay. You'd no longer have that massive initial leap. In fact, with 1 or 2 JJs, you might get a terrible ascent acceleration of like 1 meter/sec^2. It would take you 4 seconds at that rate of ascent acceleration to clear 8 meters for a jump shot, for example.

Or you could shove 5 JJs in and get 3 meter/sec^2. 5 JJs are not an insignificant investment. It'd take you over 2 seconds to jump clear for a jump shot. Still longer than it currently takes for a jump shot.



Trying to figure out fall height adds work and complexity, and it's really not needed. The equation really only needs to look at the fall speed at moment of impact. That makes it simpler and easier to implement. Then, to compute the damage from the fall, just square the velocity.

Who wants them to figure out fall height? The system doesn't seem to - it just keeps track of falling speed, which can be affected by jump jets. My initial comment was asking why you'd want to do it any other way, and I also question the relative merits of criticizing game mechanics based on physics over game balance.

I would like to see a more acceleration-based jump performance model - I've often thought that it could be better to have jump jets work faster, with a longer cooldown, rather than the current implementation. You'd retain the mobility aspect of jump jets, but still curtail poptarts a bit. But it's important that we focus our feedback, especially, on the grounds of gameplay balance and design rather than purism over physics.

PS: While I still like my solution, because of course it is the best solution possible since I made it, I still have to note that the proposed changes would have the same net effect on poptart - they're just getting it by focusing on heat buildup, which is probably a better limiter anyways.

[wanderer]

Quote

PS: Do you have PDF files of your tabletop rulebooks, or is there a reference site you're getting those images from? It'd be much more convenient to look up rules on my computer rather than dig my old manuals out from the closet every time I need to research tabletop (i.e. check my memory.)

I'm pulling them from my electronic copy of TacOps- all of the current books are also released in PDF purchasable formats.

Point being that a 'Mech firing opportunistic poptart shots is a tremendously inaccurate method of fire- which MWO stops simulating the second you cut your jets. And it has no reason to. Heck, in TT with a best-range shot on a target that didn't move, jumping is 50/50 hit rate...never mind trying to fire in mid-jump rather than after you landed!

[ZachMan119]

That's nice that the jump jets are getting an update!

[Skull Leader2]

I do NOT agree with the impression that mechs with JJ felt like agile Exoskeletons. Maybe in the low weight classes like spiders and jenners but that makes sense. If I am running a low weight mech with 3-4 JJ it better well get off that ground. When I run any medium or higher with JJ it feels very heavy and weighted. Even with a full running start in my Shadowhawk running at 110kph I barely clear the canyons on the Canyon map and I use max JJ. I'm fine with heat generation at that seems fair but I'm not sure about this reduction in height. I'm not sure my Highlander can feel any heavier and my Victor can't take too many more "fixes" and stay competitive. Will hold off final judgement until I feel it in game though.

[Void Angel]

wanderer, on 14 July 2014 - 08:08 AM, said:

Point being that a 'Mech firing opportunistic poptart shots is a tremendously inaccurate method of fire- which MWO stops simulating the second you cut your jets. And it has no reason to. Heck, in TT with a best-range shot on a target that didn't move, jumping is 50/50 hit rate...never mind trying to fire in mid-jump rather than after you landed!

Well, a best-range shot on a stationary target is actually a bit more than even (~58%) if you're an average MechWarrior; if a Veteran or Elite pilot takes the shot, the probability goes up to ~72/83% respectively. Add a targeting computer, and you're looking at an ~83/93% hit chance. Even if you're using the opportunity fire rules, your hit chance as a Veteran or Elite gunner is ~27/41% - and if you add in the targeting computer, you're back to a 58% hit chance. Thus, if we want to consider how hard it "should" be to hit during a turn where you jumped, it's not the horrifyingly unlikely gamble that it's often made out to be - that's why people did it. It's harder for the Inner Sphere, but it's not the desperation/gambling tactic it's so often claimed to be.

The problem is that we've got a disconnect in how we're applying the rules here. Sure, jumping is supposed to be less accurate than other modes of fire. Yet we've only looked at it from the attacker's point of view, while ignoring the target's actions. Even if we use the Opportunity Fire rules - which are not applicable here; every 'mech you shoot has the opportunity to fire back - the Attacker Modifiers from jumping are still dwarfed by the defensive Target Modifiers available. Something like a Locust or Dasher can have a maximum of +10 to their target number through the use of speed, terrain, and partial cover; if they gain a +8 (using Regular Mechwarrior stats for convenience,) even at Close range, it doesn't matter what the attacking 'Mech does, because he's got to roll boxcars to hit anyway. Even an Assault 'Mech can easily get a +5 or +6 in good terrain. These modifiers (or rather, their equivalents) are totally absent in MWO. The primary difficulty I have in hitting targets with anything but a slow projectile weapon is determined primarily by whether or not I can see it due to the fracking distance haze, weather, and fog. In terms of tabletop rules, that's Sensor/Visual Spotting, not Target Modifiers.

It all comes back to the different game format. NONE of tabletop Battletech's system of to-hit modifiers are authoritative to MWO, because the randomization effect of the dice is absent in this format - and many of the mechanisms which made up that system are simply semi-arbitrary abstractions that cannot be translated to MWO directly. Heavy v. Light woods, engine tonnage break points, and jump jet class cutoffs all have problems if we try to import them directly from tabletop. If my probability of hitting targets in MWO was, on average, less than 50-50, I'd find the game much less enjoyable to play.

That's why this jump jet change makes sense. It's a jump jet change focused only on how jump jets work, - as opposed to how they "ought" to work - In MWO. The linkage to engine rating will allow them to smooth out the jump jet class breakpoints, while the changes will still address the ways jump jets are enabling poptarts to over-perform. Certainly, jump-jets aren't a panacea for every real or percieved ill in the game - but then, we can't really ask it to be.

Edit: Grammar is hard

Edited by Void Angel, 15 July 2014 - 02:53 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Anyone else concerned they will take down HGN JJ thrust even more? It is already so slow...

And yes I think the Victors could use their torso twist speed again. Maybe up to -10% from -20%. Just saying... with JJs becoming less useful it could use a little bit of love. Especially with all these Timber Wolves running around.

[Void Angel]

The Highlander does worry me a bit - but hey, no one's using it as-is, so I'm sure they're looking at it pretty closely.

[Jungle Rhino]

Why on earth do they not just assign a thrust value to each JJ and then calculate the acceleration based on the mass of the 'mech??

This could then be affected by the gravity of each map and make a really interesting and dynamic system.

The maths behind this is incredibly straightforward. It should really tie into a complete collision system which tracks the velocity of your mech in 3D space and then applies damage based on any acceleration (or deceleration more specifically) beyond a given threshold. Location of damage could be guesstimated by apportionment based on the direction of the deceleration vector.

They probably have better things to spend their bandwidth on though...

[SethAbercromby]

the thing with tonnage is that TT pretty much already solved that for them. We have 4 classes of Jump Jets, one for each 'Mech class respectively and with scaling weight. Each Jump Jet class has the power to propel the largest tonnage of the class at the speed it currently has. For the lower tonnages of the class, the jets have a slightly reduced output to compensate for a smaller fuel tank and to have some jump consistency (I'm assuming the fuel tank is included into the structural weight and is scaled to tonnage to not extend into critspace). For collision, you can for the most part simply use the 2D vector responsible for movement on the X and Y axis (assuming Z is used for height). This eliminates a lot of calculation effort and I think that'd be more consistent for collisions on land and in air, while being accurrate enough for damage simulation. We're gonna need special rules for DFAs anyway, so adding the Z vector to the speed wouldn't really add up too much.

The location of damage can simply be detected by the component reporting the collision for damage calculation...

[Yokomohoyo]

Void Angel, on 13 July 2014 - 08:55 AM, said:

In the final analysis, jump jets have become an agility tool, rather than a mobility tool. You can use them in myriad ways to gain advantages over your ground-bound enemies that are not commensurate with the tonnage you invested, or the risks involved with the jets' use. That needs to change, and this change can easily do that. We still need a solution to the disparity in weapon types, but that can be solved simply by tweaking the numbers for weapon cooldowns, damage, heat, et cetera - once jump jets aren't making the problem situationally worse.

Jump jets should be an agility tool that is why in the canon they are at +1 difficulty to hit for using jump jets. However in MechWarrior Online jump jets just float in the air like a blimp which in the canon would probably be a bonus of -5 to the difficulty to hit. I invested 7 tons in jump jets for my QuickDraw in MechWarrior Online which is the weight of a PPC/ER PPC with more than twice the space but for their investment the performance of 7 jump jets is equal to that of a flamer. However, in MechWarrior Online the performance of 1 jump jet in a Highlander for its investment is equal to the UAC/20 in the canon.

YueFei, on 13 July 2014 - 10:51 AM, said:

Yes, jumping is a way to get a shot off in as little time as possible, superior to doing a berm-drill because hill climb mechanics make it difficult to cleanly do a berm drill quickly. And the wonky physics of MWO jump jets makes the jump happen very quickly. I'd welcome tweaks to JJs, but I also don't want to see it go overboard where JJs ascend and descend super slowly. I mean, I'm fine if ascent/descent is slow with only 1 or 2 JJs... but to strap on 5 or more JJs should give massive boosts.

You have clearly demonstrated and show with a video that it is the movement nerfs that made jump sniping the only competitive playstyle; yet no one cares, they just want to nerf jump jets and in a way which would have no effect on jump sniping and exterminate the few brawlers left that depend on jump jets to overcome the movement and sensors nerfs.

Void Angel, on 13 July 2014 - 06:37 PM, said:

I would like to see a more acceleration-based jump performance model - I've often thought that it could be better to have jump jets work faster, with a longer cooldown, rather than the current implementation. You'd retain the mobility aspect of jump jets, but still curtail poptarts a bit. But it's important that we focus our feedback, especially, on the grounds of gameplay balance and design rather than purism over physics.

Now this is a real solution that makes sense instead the popular nerfing method. Having jump jets powered by the engine with cooldowns that go from massive for 1 jump jet to minimal for 5+ jump jets. Having jump jets powered by fuel makes no sense when your engine is a powerful reactor. Jump jets should not need micromanagement to avoid falling damage. Jump jet cooldown should only be for lift not to avoid falls. Jump jets should activate instantly overriding cooldown in the case of a fall to avoid fall damage including those mechs with only 1 jump jet. This would make 1 jump jet the only requirement for fast moving mechs to avoid falling damage as it should be.

Edited by Yokomohoyo, 15 July 2014 - 07:50 AM.

[Void Angel]

As I have demonstrated over and over and over again, to you and to others, "canon" isn't an authority for specidic mechanics in MWO because it 1) doesn't translate well from fiction and/or tabletop to this game type, and 2) isn't even consistent within itself. But even so, if you do want to treat tabletop as a suicide pact, jump jets were still primarily used to traverse difficult or impassable terrain, not to pop over the ridgeline and defeat cover - such activities incurred a massive penalty. Firing after you jumped was a minor penalty compared to running - just as the +1 extra target mod was a minor bonus for you; sure, you were able to trade the smallest possible modification in accuracy for the smallest possible defensive mod, but that doesn't prove your point. Jumping constantly, round after round, wasn't designed to be efficient in tabletop - especially jumping far enough to actually achieve a decent target modifier - which is just what these changes are designed to account for. You can play semantic games about the precise meaning of "agility," if you like... But even from the standpoint of tabletop, these changes should be happening.

Yokomohoyo, on 15 July 2014 - 07:35 AM, said:

You have clearly demonstrated and show with a video that it is the movement nerfs that made jump sniping the only competitive playstyle; yet no one cares, they just want to nerf jump jets and in a way which would have no effect on jump sniping and exterminate the few brawlers left that depend on jump jets to overcome the movement and sensors nerfs.

I don't buy the idea that hill climb penalties made jump sniping "only competitive playstyle." Jump snipers were dominant long before reduced hill movement was implemented; I can name you the exact patch, actually. I've already explained how this will affect jump snipers, and affect them more due to the high heat cost of their bread and butter weapon, the PPC - yet you've simply returned over and over again to the tired, sad formula of game conspiracy theorists everywhere: "I didn't get the change I wanted, so [Game Company] wants to exterminate [Class, Build, Tactic, Gender, whatever] since they like [thing I dislike] here!" That your assertion: relies on information you don't have; draws conclusions that are not supported by what information you do have; and contradicts not only how our devs have told us they develop games, but the common practice of the entire game development industry does not seem to trouble you in the slightest - if you've even considered these points at all.

Edited by Void Angel, 15 July 2014 - 02:50 PM.

[Cimarb]

SethAbercromby, on 15 July 2014 - 06:35 AM, said:

the thing with tonnage is that TT pretty much already solved that for them. We have 4 classes of Jump Jets, one for each 'Mech class respectively and with scaling weight. Each Jump Jet class has the power to propel the largest tonnage of the class at the speed it currently has. For the lower tonnages of the class, the jets have a slightly reduced output to compensate for a smaller fuel tank and to have some jump consistency (I'm assuming the fuel tank is included into the structural weight and is scaled to tonnage to not extend into critspace). For collision, you can for the most part simply use the 2D vector responsible for movement on the X and Y axis (assuming Z is used for height). This eliminates a lot of calculation effort and I think that'd be more consistent for collisions on land and in air, while being accurrate enough for damage simulation. We're gonna need special rules for DFAs anyway, so adding the Z vector to the speed wouldn't really add up too much.

The location of damage can simply be detected by the component reporting the collision for damage calculation...

Your idea falls apart from the start because there are more than four classes of jump jets, and none of them align with the weight classes of battlemechs. Then it falls apart further because you are giving the heaviest of the weight class the full power of the jump jets, but say the lower of the weight classes would somehow get less results out of the same jets...

[SethAbercromby]

Yes, I was wrting the part with the classes without fact-checking, however, there are 5 Jump Jet classes for 5 different weight groups. See here for a list. And apparently you don't like reading either because I went ahead and assumed that the jets don't fire at full power for the slightly lighter 'Mechs they are compatible with to compensate for a slighty smaller fuel tank that fits better into the smaller structure. I think what you're really on is "why would you use the same type if it's toned down instead of one that is perfect?". The anser is simply money. If you had the option to sell 5 different Jump Jet classes that will cover all 'Mech up to 100 tons, or rather sell 17 different classes for each individual weight rating just so they all perform at full power in use? I wouldn't because that's a waste of money and rescources.

[Void Angel]

Tabletop did not "solve" any balance problems for MWO - and it never has. In fact, there are instances where importing 'Mech and equipment stats directly from tabletop has a markedly detrimental effect on MWO. The Locust's legs being 25% weaker than they should be is just one example.

[Chemie]

JJ have always provide too much vertical and not enough horizontal. (There was time when they had zero horizontal). If they provide way more horizontal, it would nerf poptarting and provide better movement (nothing worse than not being able to climb a hill with JJ).

[Mechteric]

6 jump jets on a Griffin now only clear level 1 height in Canyon Network. I have to use jets with the ramp to make it up to the 2nd level even with 6 jets. Taking 1 jet also lets you clear level 2 height, just with slightly more effort and assist from the terrain.

This seem really backwards, that spending tonnage on 6 jets gets you only 1 level in height. Even in table top you got to jump 1 level per jet. At the least let 6 jump jets clear half that. Jump snipers are going to be just fine taking multiple jets (since most blocking objects are only level 1 height), the only thing this really did is hurt those who were using jets to maneuver around maps that had some interesting elevation differences (Tourmaline, 2-level deck on Crimson Straight).


Mechwarrior Living Legends is the model for how to make sure jump jets are fun for non jump snipers and yet still balanced for them. They jet you fast and high, but build up lots of heat, recharge slowly, and leave you in hang-time for longer amounts of time open to retaliation. See what I mean here:

http://youtu.be/GF8uZ4VYRW8?t=1m21s

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 15 July 2014 - 02:39 PM.

[XphR]

Give me back jump jet lift, let me feather them for distance and let me fall from the sky like a rock if I forget to save fuel. Im fine with shake, Im fine with heat, I miss jetting up gracefully up onto ledges when I timed it right and sliding to the bottom across my face when I miscalculated.

At the very least let me manipulate the direction of the jump vents from back to down to maximize height or length but never both at once?

[Mechteric]

After taking a CTF-3D with the max 4 jets I think its pointless now (more than before) to have more than 1. Since all you're going to be able to use it for is feathering landings when dropping off a level, climbing assistance, and jump-turns, and 1 does plenty fine at that compared with how little benefit going to 4 had.



The only positive thing I have to say is making the heat not dissipate while jets are active was actually a good idea. Please keep this feature, but change the verticality.

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 15 July 2014 - 03:00 PM.