32 replies to this topic

[Clit Beastwood]

stjobe, on 24 July 2014 - 01:50 PM, said:

That depends, really. Most people when they use that argument relies on the reader thinking "shoot once, then wait 10 seconds" - but it might just as well be thought of as being "every weapon has an individual 10-second internal cooldown, so if I have five weapons I can fire one every other second".

Which would mean you'd fire more often than now, but with less weapons at a time.

I think everyone can understand what this would mean for TTK. Battles would be less "alpha all the tiem!" and more maneuvering to keep your fire on target.

Personally, I'd love to try it.


1v1 a TT light had a good chance of beating an assault. Lose initiative, you run as many hexes as you can, preferably behind cover. Win initiative and you get to move after the assault. Place yourself directly behind it, so the most he can hit you with is one of his arms or any rear-mounted weaponry. If you've played smart his chances to hit will be extremely low to non-existent, and you'll kill him with a thousand paper cuts.

In MWO, a light pilot still has a pretty good chance of beating the assault given a proficient enough light pilot and a reasonable build - super easy if you find something loaded up with lrm's and std. ppc's (I lol when I see those - mmmmm gonna strip 'em to farm damage and punish them! Remove leg, arm, arm, remove all the torso armor, remove the leg armor, head killshot (or an arty because its funny to arty legged dudes).

[General Taskeen]

Vassago Rain, on 24 July 2014 - 10:13 AM, said:

You're gonna be using an XL in a jenner, not a standard.

People use a standard all the time in a Jenner, in Stock Matches. And I wish it was a friggin' mode already *glares at PGI*

[Artgathan]

3rdworld, on 24 July 2014 - 01:13 PM, said:

In TT a head hit from a AC/20 kills anything.

True, but this example is sort of an irrelevant edge case for the discussion here.

1453 R, on 24 July 2014 - 01:22 PM, said:

So what you're saying is that assault 'Mechs should all move like legged Dire Whales and light 'Mechs need to be completely impervious to anything but the attentions of another light 'Mech.

I'm primarily a 40-60-ton range player who prefers mobility to bigger hammers and even I think that's kind of whacked. If the assault 'Mech never gets to bring any of its firepower to bear on a target because it needs to hit a dead stop if it wants to turn faster than the Death Star, the heck is the point of having all that firepower in the first place?

All aboard the hyperbole train I guess. Assaults would still be able to track and engage light mechs, but they would have to do so while: not running full steam ahead, and preferably at long range. That said, (and I didn't make this clear in the OP unfortunately) but I don't think we should follow TT to the letter of the law here - I don't think a mech should be forced to run straight forwards, unable to turn, if it is moving at top speed. The point was more that a mech should turn fastest when stopped/moving at slow speeds. This is how tanks and cars operate in real life.

elismallz, on 24 July 2014 - 01:56 PM, said:

I think we could see this as a mutual buff, weighted more toward lights. In a Jenner or Firestarter with max engine I can run a full 2 cirlces around a baddie in under 10 seconds (the supposed turn to second time conversion). In TT, assuming I was starting the turn facing the proper direction, it would take me 10 MPs (out of the Jenner's 11) to do a full circle and end up where I started. The theory crafting math is admirable but doesn't apply in MW:O world IMO.

Ultimately I think this change would take away mobility from lights, as we won't be able to juke while running away full speed from that lance of heavies we accidentally stumbled upon.

I'll agree that it was a mutual buff, but in favor of slow mechs. Consider that the Jenner only had a ~10% mobility penalty (IE: it received a 10% buff) compared to the Atlas' 20%. Lights, by virtue of being faster, would still be able to juke while running - it's the Assaults that wouldn't be able to.

Also, to build on your example, if a Light (using this new system) ran headlong into a heavy lance moving at top speed, there'd be a few precious seconds before the Heavies could engage properly (since they would need to slow down to start turning fast enough to keep up with the light), while the light could just keep running straight to get to cover.

I agree that mechanics can't be ported over without some modification. I firmly believe some of the class imbalance present in MW:O is a result of various issues with the mobility of different mechs. Looking to TT for a potential solution (in this case, having your turn speed be a function of your current speed) may help to balance the game.

Gyrok, on 24 July 2014 - 01:58 PM, said:

Ok, make the AC20 kill the Jenner in 1 shot, to any torso, just like TT and you got it...no problem.

This was explained above. If you have a fully armored Jenner in TT, it won't get one shot by an AC/20.

Fierostetz, on 24 July 2014 - 02:09 PM, said:

A light mech's speed is in it's strength, so it makes sense to capitalize on that as much as possible... by making it as fast as possible. I've built slower lights (urbiespider - much love!) but as a joke. Turn based mechanics don't translate well to a real-time game - when I fire a weapon, it goes where I aim, not a random location decided by a dice. When I take missiles, I can turn to roll the damage, not wait to see what fate decides that barrage did to me. If MWO rigidly adhered to TT everything, nobody would play it except a small core of TT nerds. (I use "nerd" reverently, not as an insult). You might be happier with MW:Tactics, perhaps? This is a skill-based game, but I see a lot of posts where people recommend introducing TT mechanics to remove skill (aim, rolling damage, maneuvering, intelligent positioning, using visual cover). That sounds like a game killer... turning mwo into a game of chance... no thank you.

Brief Point about MW:Tactics: drives me crazy. The double blind system makes actual strategy difficult and just reduces the whole thing to a guessing game.

That said, as above, I agree that we can't port mechanics directly from TT to MW:O. This is more about taking inspiration from TT and seeing the effects it would have if implemented in MW:O.

Fierostetz, on 24 July 2014 - 02:13 PM, said:

In MWO, a light pilot still has a pretty good chance of beating the assault given a proficient enough light pilot and a reasonable build - super easy if you find something loaded up with lrm's and std. ppc's (I lol when I see those - mmmmm gonna strip 'em to farm damage and punish them! Remove leg, arm, arm, remove all the torso armor, remove the leg armor, head killshot (or an arty because its funny to arty legged dudes).

In MWO a light pilot only has a pretty good chance of beating an assault pilot if:

1. As you pointed out, the Assault has an easily exploited weakness
2. The pilot is incompetant.

Otherwise the light will get vaporized.

[Wolfways]

Artgathan, on 24 July 2014 - 09:37 PM, said:

Assaults would still be able to track and engage light mechs, but they would have to do so while: not running full steam ahead, and preferably at long range.

In that case you already got your wish as assaults fighting lights at short range walk backwards (or do if they know what they're doing) as it's easier to keep the light in LOS. This forces them to reduce their speed.

[Sandslice]

Artgathan, on 24 July 2014 - 09:25 AM, said:

Previously, in a different thread (found here: http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1) I discussed how engine sizes interact with mech mobility, and how Assault mechs are impossible to out-maneuver at any range greater than 25m. I'd like to revisit the topic of mech mobility, but from a new standpoint.

Fair Warning: this argument uses a reference to the Table-Top Method of Battlemech Operation. I will make the argument that MW:O Mechs do not behave as TT Mechs, and this causes at least some balance issues.

Caveat: torso rotation is already keyed to max speed - which means that assaults have a rather hard time tracking. As an example, on a most excellent Mordor run last night, my slower (280 XLE = x8 = 140kph) Jenner-F was easily able to circle dance a Dire Pickle (who seemed confused since I had a fair bit of help and his own Jenner pal wasn't even trying to dance with me,) as well as a Pretty Baby who was actively trying to dance with me.

Had I stayed in front of either assault, they would have been able to track and attack me, and I wouldn't be calling the run excellent but a derp-and-dead. But I was not in their front, and they couldn't track me with their slower (max speed throttled) rotations.

The system's working fine for a given proper application of light 'Mech combat theory.

[Sephlock]

Viktor Drake, on 24 July 2014 - 11:41 AM, said:

Here is the thing. Many TT rules don't fit the game for multiple different reasons. For example being able to fire your weapons only once every 10 seconds wouldn't be a hell of alot of fun.

Gauss haters seem to think that weapon firing delays are just AWESOME though.

[Xiang]

Gyrok, on 24 July 2014 - 01:58 PM, said:

Ok, make the AC20 kill the Jenner in 1 shot, to any torso, just like TT and you got it...no problem.

Not sure if this was mentioned as i stopped reading when i saw the same arguement 3 times....

The reason you cant 1 shot a mech with an AC20 or head shot a mech is due to the doubled armor that was given to all mechs to make up for the faster fire rate. If you want to 1 shot a mech, then you wouldnt be able to fire that weapon again for 10 seconds. And in 10 seconds you would only crawl 90 meters forward (not counting any turns you make) in an assault.

As it is, you only have 2x armor, but yet there are some weapons that can fire 3x in 10 secs, so the conversion from TT to MWO is not an exact science. So if you want to kill that light, you can still do it in 10 seconds since you can fire your AC20 2x in 8-9 seconds, you just have to hit the same spot.

What is really whacked out is when you can shoot an atlas in the back with 4 med lasers and 2 MG while he is occupied with a teammate, then he overheats and you shoot him 2 more times in the back and he still has armor. That is over 60 pts of damage to his back, while he is immobile and he is not dead? If he had 60 pts of armor on his CT back, then he should have been dead from the attack he was facing at his front. Go figure....

Xiang

[YueFei]

Wolfways, on 24 July 2014 - 10:01 PM, said:

In that case you already got your wish as assaults fighting lights at short range walk backwards (or do if they know what they're doing) as it's easier to keep the light in LOS. This forces them to reduce their speed.

Turn rate at max speed vs turn rate when standing still is almost the same in MWO. For some reason.

The reason an Assault mech walks backward is to force the Light mech into a wider turn circle. The wider the circle, the longer it takes the Light mech to run around it. The Assault mech's turn radius isn't really relevant, it's his turn rate that matters.

If the Assault mech must suffer loss of turn rate in order to walk backward, it makes it harder for the Assault mech to track a faster enemy.

Edited by YueFei, 24 July 2014 - 11:08 PM.

[Transcendence]

We can't have this discussion without also discussing that lights can customize their loadout to bring really cheese or (in tt terms) higher-than-stock BV loadouts? If you nerf assault and heavy mobility - you're giving lighter mechs a much stronger buff - unless you limit their weapons loadouts in return.

Edit: autocorrect sucks

Edited by Transcendence, 24 July 2014 - 11:14 PM.

[Wolfways]

YueFei, on 24 July 2014 - 11:08 PM, said:

Turn rate at max speed vs turn rate when standing still is almost the same in MWO. For some reason.

The reason an Assault mech walks backward is to force the Light mech into a wider turn circle. The wider the circle, the longer it takes the Light mech to run around it. The Assault mech's turn radius isn't really relevant, it's his turn rate that matters.

If the Assault mech must suffer loss of turn rate in order to walk backward, it makes it harder for the Assault mech to track a faster enemy.

My point was that the OP wanted assaults not to be able to fight lights at close range while "running full steam ahead". They don't.

[Gyrok]

Artgathan, on 24 July 2014 - 09:37 PM, said:

True, but this example is sort of an irrelevant edge case for the discussion here.



All aboard the hyperbole train I guess. Assaults would still be able to track and engage light mechs, but they would have to do so while: not running full steam ahead, and preferably at long range. That said, (and I didn't make this clear in the OP unfortunately) but I don't think we should follow TT to the letter of the law here - I don't think a mech should be forced to run straight forwards, unable to turn, if it is moving at top speed. The point was more that a mech should turn fastest when stopped/moving at slow speeds. This is how tanks and cars operate in real life.



I'll agree that it was a mutual buff, but in favor of slow mechs. Consider that the Jenner only had a ~10% mobility penalty (IE: it received a 10% buff) compared to the Atlas' 20%. Lights, by virtue of being faster, would still be able to juke while running - it's the Assaults that wouldn't be able to.

Also, to build on your example, if a Light (using this new system) ran headlong into a heavy lance moving at top speed, there'd be a few precious seconds before the Heavies could engage properly (since they would need to slow down to start turning fast enough to keep up with the light), while the light could just keep running straight to get to cover.

I agree that mechanics can't be ported over without some modification. I firmly believe some of the class imbalance present in MW:O is a result of various issues with the mobility of different mechs. Looking to TT for a potential solution (in this case, having your turn speed be a function of your current speed) may help to balance the game.



This was explained above. If you have a fully armored Jenner in TT, it won't get one shot by an AC/20.



Brief Point about MW:Tactics: drives me crazy. The double blind system makes actual strategy difficult and just reduces the whole thing to a guessing game.

That said, as above, I agree that we can't port mechanics directly from TT to MW:O. This is more about taking inspiration from TT and seeing the effects it would have if implemented in MW:O.



In MWO a light pilot only has a pretty good chance of beating an assault pilot if:

1. As you pointed out, the Assault has an easily exploited weakness
2. The pilot is incompetant.

Otherwise the light will get vaporized.

There are no fully armored Jenners in TT.

GG

[Khobai]

Quote

Turn rate at max speed vs turn rate when standing still is almost the same in MWO. For some reason.

No its not. You turn much faster if you throttle down.

[Artgathan]

YueFei, on 24 July 2014 - 11:08 PM, said:

Turn rate at max speed vs turn rate when standing still is almost the same in MWO. For some reason.

The reason an Assault mech walks backward is to force the Light mech into a wider turn circle. The wider the circle, the longer it takes the Light mech to run around it. The Assault mech's turn radius isn't really relevant, it's his turn rate that matters.

If the Assault mech must suffer loss of turn rate in order to walk backward, it makes it harder for the Assault mech to track a faster enemy.

Fun Fact: every mech in the game (except the Highlander and Victor due to their special nerfs) circumscribes a circle of ~25m when running at their maximum speed and turning.

Transcendence, on 24 July 2014 - 11:13 PM, said:

We can't have this discussion without also discussing that lights can customize their loadout to bring really cheese or (in tt terms) higher-than-stock BV loadouts? If you nerf assault and heavy mobility - you're giving lighter mechs a much stronger buff - unless you limit their weapons loadouts in return.

Edit: autocorrect sucks

If only Assaults could also customize their loadouts...

The size of the engine that lights are forced to bring to remain relevant limits their weapons loadout in any case.

Gyrok, on 25 July 2014 - 12:37 AM, said:

There are no fully armored Jenners in TT.

GG

Keep cherry-picking which elements of TT you do / do not want to port over, it makes for a really great argument.

Khobai, on 25 July 2014 - 01:37 AM, said:

No its not. You turn much faster if you throttle down.

There is a small difference, but I don't think it amounts to much. (I'll try to get some numbers for this).

EDIT: Checked out the throttle turn speed difference. It appears all mechs have their turn speed reduced by ~30% when turning at full speed. (IE: It took an Atlas 10 sec to turn around standing still, 15 sec to turn around when running full speed. A Locust took 3 sec to turn around standing still, ~4.5 sec to turn around running full speed).

In lieu of these numbers, I'd suggest buffing the turn speed of faster mechs when they're at top speed (IE: only reduce their turn speed by 10% when running at full speed), or slightly increasing the turn speed reduction for slower machines.

Edited by Artgathan, 25 July 2014 - 04:40 AM.