10 replies to this topic

[zagibu]

This shall be a collection of the top issues MWO still suffers from. Please post the thing that bugs you most about MWO, and I will update the OP periodically to include your opinion and match it against other player's issues.

• 2 Instant convergence pinpoint alpha strikes
  
• 1 No ingame team balancing resulting in 10 vs 12 matches (or worse) frequently
  
• 1 ECM (no further specification)
  
• 1 Weapons balance (ballistics > energy > missiles)
  
• 1 Boring random PUG matchmaking like WoT. Needs more options like Clan vs. IS, etc.
  
• 1 Heat rework: Heat cap at 30 and heat cap per sink 0.1. Implement TT heat effects.

I will start with the fact that there is no ingame team balancing, so if 2 players don't connect on one team, the match is effectively a 12 vs 10, instead of a 11 vs 11 like in any other game.

Edited by zagibu, 04 October 2014 - 01:51 PM.

[Glythe]

ECM
"Double heat sinks"
both enhanced vision modes suck now
Clan mechs >>> IS mechs
Ghost heat
Airstrikes/artillery/consumables exist
Elo
Forced weight matchmaking
JJ shake is both ridiculous and necessary to prevent poptarting
Ballistics lost too much range
Double gauss is too powerful
Knockdowns got removed
Cockpit shake is way overdone (if I'm in the left eye and you didn't shoot the head why did I shake)


I think that about covers it.

[El Bandito]

One of the obvious issue ATM is the balance of ballistic, energy and missile loadouts. Basically, a ballistic mech is good in most situations in most Elo/weight range, while energy mech is much less desirable in weight over 45 tons, unless it can mount JJs. Missile mechs are always hit or miss (literally in the case of SRMs, HSR will screw you raw) and LRMs can be great in pugs but useless in comp play.

Needs to be addressed.

Edited by El Bandito, 04 October 2014 - 06:13 AM.

[Riverboat Sam]

Limited, unimaginative, BORING match building. I know, I know, they do it "just like World of Tanks", so it must be right. Right?

Matches could be so much more. How about giving us options like a Clan v. IS queue? How about an option for a single group lance v. a 12 man pug in some sort of capture ground challenge? There are so, so many ways PGI could draw on the best of the old Mechwarrior games to come up with fun and creative game modes - but all they ever think of is, "World of Tanks is the most profitable free to play ever so we must do EVERYTHING the way World of Tanks does it".

[Wolfways]

Memory Allocation error.
No 12v10 IS v clan queue.
Far too much freedom in customizing IS mechs (mostly engines because everything is too fast).
Maps are too small and bland.
Convergence (too much damage possible in one hit)
ECM.
Weapon balance (LRM's are weak, AC's are OP, lasers are too hot)

[Xanquil]

The biggest one: perfect instant convergent pinpoint alpha strikes.
Followed by ECM
Heat, weapon balance, and TTK all require these to be addressed otherwise we are just putting another Band-Aid on the problem and letting it continue to fester.

[Johnny Z]

Instant convergence is more of a problem since clan tech entered the game. Some of the alphas are way to high, simple as that. My fully armored medium mech is losing pieces in single alphas from dire wolves like right leg gone, next shot right arm gone, next shot right torso gone.

And I am not talking about standing still. My wolverine was running across a gap at 97.2 kph in mid air using jump jets and before I landed my fully armoured right leg was gone. Landed on the other side of the gap legged.......

I peaked over a hill once in my Orion for exactly 3 second and lost right torso, left torso then center torso in that order....... it was nearly instantaneous.

I am not sure what is to be done about this. But matches at the moment 1 dire wolf, 1 warhawk, 1 t-wolf, all on the same team getting all the victories....

Edited by Johnny Z, 04 October 2014 - 08:39 AM.

[zagibu]

I do agree that the high alphas are a problem, but for me, it's much less enjoyable to start a game already 2 men down.

[Alistair Winter]

Wouldn't it be easier to bump one of these threads from 6-8 months ago? The game hasn't changed all that much lately.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

My top five issues that I'd like to see addressed in MWO:

• Go with a 30 Heat Capacity with reduced Heat Sink Capacity to 0.1 for SHS and DHS. Then consider implementing Heat Effects.
  
  
  Spoiler

  So that 10 SHS or DHS only raises Capacity a combined 1. This would allow the original scale to be implemented with heat penalties starting with an avoidable shutdown at 14.
  (follow by adding heat penalties, with tweaks to heat, heat scale penalties and heat dissipation, including external DHS, also like the idea of exponential decay for dissipation and heat)
  
  
  

  ---

• Lock On Independence from ECM (followed by tweaks to ECM, LRMs, SSRMs and looking to make SRMs actual missiles!)

Follow-up Tweaks after Locking change:

Spoiler

With LRMs, I'd look to bring the missile count from 180 back to 120 (and make them 1 damage per missile), then at least bring the cooldown on all of them (from 5 to 20) to 6.67.

Next, I'd apply a modified SSRM 'bone' Targeting system to how they hit so that the spread is more efficient and CT coring is reduced.

Then increase missile speed. After that if they are 'under' powered, then I'd see about testing a fire, lock, and forget style for LRMs.

With SRMs, I'd apple the SSRM 'bone' Targeting system, but like LRMs allow them to fire without a lock. Then boost missile count to 120 missiles to help lights and mediums.

Plus we need this to happen too

---

• Continue Hit Box tweaks
  
  
  (continue the tweaks, it was going well until it was stopped)
  

  ---

  
  
• Convert all Mech Tree efficiencies into unlock-able Modules and adjust values.
  
  
  
  
  Spoiler

  This way we can keep what has been worked on (Grinded) in the current 'Skills' Tab, but we would need to choose between them to see what will be improved on the mech. By having to make such choices on what will be used in a match, the devs can still add more quirks and continue adding to that particular system.
  
  

  ---

  
  
• Increase the number of Modules (and add a new system, details here) to have another method to dynamically customize our mechs. And also allow certain Equipment to increase the available slots to mount Modules.
  
  
  
  Spoiler

  I'd continue adding new 'modules' such as, Counter Battery, Radar Decoy and so on, and convert some existing gear to the module system, such as needing to slot Night Vision and Thermal Vision. (I'd also make TAG have it's own unique Hardpoint, like AMS and ECM, so that it doesn't occupy an Energy Slot.)
  
  This way, different modules will be set in different categories and would be restricted to particular slots from different pieces of equipment.
  
  Want to have a global impact, mount TAG or Command Console to mount a Counter Battery module to increase strike cooldown. Want to call artillery mount TAG or Command Console.
  
  Want to trick the enemy with a false radar blimp mount ECM for the Radar Decoy.
  
  Want to use a UAV, mount BAP to be able to slot it for a match and to be able to use the module to modify the UAV. Want to use Seismic, mount BAP.
  
  Want to build an agile brawler, then utilize the newly converted Mech Tree Efficiencies boost your mech over increasing Radar Range, mounting a Vision module or a sensor.
  
  With enough affordable choices, we can then build better dynamic Roles, with further adjustments to default values, and how much the default values get boosted by the choices made with modules.
  
  With synergies from more Mech Quirks and we could see something like the SDR-5V currently being useless, to being invaluable for Recon-based quirks that could increase sensor range so that it can spot at extended ranges.
  
  Or have a Jenner remain the ultimate Speedy Striker, but weak as a spotter and so on.
  
  Here was a mock-up I made recently, so it still needs plenty of refinement, but is more or less what we could see in the future with the idea I'm trying to describe in #5.
  

  Spoiler

  

[zagibu]

Alistair Winter, on 04 October 2014 - 12:22 PM, said:

Wouldn't it be easier to bump one of these threads from 6-8 months ago? The game hasn't changed all that much lately.

Sure, if you link me to a thread that did a comprehensive collection by summarizing and counting all opinions.