418 replies to this topic

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Victor Morson, on 06 October 2014 - 06:36 PM, said:

I hate to tell you that most of what everyone hates is Cone of Fire and Growing Reticle.

Most ppl in CB (me included) said they left other games because of this crap (WoT for example "brrrraaaang the shot didnt penetrate") so theyd leave THIS game if it was added

[Johnny Z]

Belorion, on 06 October 2014 - 06:31 PM, said:

I am fine with everything they put in... Most of what a very vocal minor on the forums want I will quit over.

Cone of Fire
Growing Reticle
Hard point sizes

all terrible ideas that would kill the fun of this game for me. I think Russ hit the nail on the head with the fact that many of the possible builds now will die, and the number of viable builds will go down, not go up...

I will take a wild guess and say your running a Cheese Wolf atm? By that I mean a Dire with dual gauss and friends?

Either way, Mechwarrior/Battletech was never meant to be an alpha strike win game. If your looking for 1 shot wins then this isnt the game you want maybe. These are 20 to 100 tons future tech sc-fi bipedal(mostly) vehicular battlefield transport devices not meant to be taken down in one or two shots.

If they remove the "I WIN" button your out?

Edited by Johnny Z, 06 October 2014 - 06:45 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

Ah the Bushwacker Vic, those were the days!. Those hitboxes mmmmm! And reflective armour ... and the fact the LXB was a hell of a beast in MW4

MW4 had the great advantage that there were very delineated ranges at where certain weapons became the situational 'best'

Light Gauss countered ERLL above 800m
ERLL dominated 400-800
LBX10s and 20s tended to dominate 0-400 or so

This made mixing teams and specialties and positioning them in the right places at the right times ensured victory.

MWO has the odd position of having better overall weapons balance (more weapons are usable) yet less roles for those weapons in many ways. There is more attrition in MWO and less defining ranges and contacts - but I actually made a thread about that a while back. It is neither bad nr good just different.

[Belorion]

Johnny Z, on 06 October 2014 - 06:44 PM, said:

I will take a wild guess and say your running a Cheese Wolf atm? By that I mean a Dire with dual gauss and friends?

If they remove the "I WIN" button your out?

I have zero clan mechs... Currently running mostly a D-DC, Victor's and Orion's. I still like to bring out my Cent's from time to time, and I run Firestarters when lighting. I do have a dual guass jager and a dual gauss phract build that I use occasionally but they aren't my most run mechs by any means.

[Johnny Z]

Belorion, on 06 October 2014 - 06:51 PM, said:

I have zero clan mechs... Currently running mostly a D-DC, Victor's and Orion's. I still like to bring out my Cent's from time to time, and I run Firestarters when lighting. I do have a dual guass jager and a dual gauss phract build that I use occasionally but they aren't my most run mechs by any means.

Were you in the team that was entirely comprised of gauss rifle mechs I dropped against in the solo queue by chance? I have to admit it only happened once and recently but the entire opposite team had gauss rifles. Wasnt pretty. Maybe one or two didnt but I didnt notice.

Edited by Johnny Z, 06 October 2014 - 06:55 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Johnny Z, on 06 October 2014 - 06:44 PM, said:

I will take a wild guess and say your running a Cheese Wolf atm? By that I mean a Dire with dual gauss and friends?

Hey! I am!

Quote

If your looking for 1 shot wins then this isnt the game you want maybe.

Id disagree

[Belorion]

Johnny Z, on 06 October 2014 - 06:54 PM, said:

Were you in the team that was entirely comprised of gauss rifle mechs I dropped against in the solo queue by chance? I have to admit it only happened once and recently but the entire opposite team had gauss rifles. Wasnt pretty. Maybe one or two didnt but I didnt notice.

lol... no, haven't done that recently, but back in the day I was part of a drop with all dual guass kitties, and some LBX10 cats. (This was pre 12v12)... it was pretty fun.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Belorion, on 06 October 2014 - 06:51 PM, said:

I have zero clan mechs... Currently running mostly a D-DC, Victor's and Orion's. I still like to bring out my Cent's from time to time, and I run Firestarters when lighting. I do have a dual guass jager and a dual gauss phract build that I use occasionally but they aren't my most run mechs by any means.

There should not be an apostrophe

Belorion, on 06 October 2014 - 06:58 PM, said:

lol... no, haven't done that recently, but back in the day I was part of a drop with all dual guass kitties, and some LBX10 cats. (This was pre 12v12)... it was pretty fun.

Lol the MC I used to be in used to run nothing but dual gauss mechs before 3333

[Tincan Nightmare]

I'm curious about the people who say that customization is critical to MWO's success, since how much customization is there when you need a meta build to succeed? Pretty much right now everyone follows the same formula for any mech they have, get DHS and Endo, mount an XL if your hit boxes allow it, then mount meta weapons build. Is there really cusomization in this game if to be successful you must buy the top tier mechs and use the same cookie cutter builds to be successful? I'm not saying that hardpoint limitations alone would solve this issue, but I wouldn't mind trying ANYTHING at this point that might shake up the same old builds you see all the time. Yes you would need other changes as well, such as changes to the heat system and the new quirks system, but I don't think it would make variety less, as many variants would have to adjust what they bring to a fight and the tactics they use.

[Belorion]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 06 October 2014 - 06:58 PM, said:

There should not be an apostrophe

I know, but I like the way it looks better. Probably from doing it on acronyms first like LRM's or LBX-10's since LRMes and LBX-10es would be wrong as well.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Tincan Nightmare, on 06 October 2014 - 07:01 PM, said:

I'm curious about the people who say that customization is critical to MWO's success, since how much customization is there when you need a meta build to succeed?

Not everyone runs meta. Today is literally the first time ive ever tried a meta build and Ive been here since day 1 CB

Belorion, on 06 October 2014 - 07:01 PM, said:

I know, but I like the way it looks better. Probably from doing it on acronyms first like LRM's or LBX-10's since LRMes and LBX-10es would be wrong as well.

then dont put an e?

I always just said lrms and lbxs - no es

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 06 October 2014 - 07:04 PM.

[Johnny Z]

Well first thing is it shouldnt be "class 1" etc it should probly be HP 1 etc (hard point) or something similar. For these forums anyway, not in game maybe. I am trying to decrypt the Op now.

BTW where are the uber brainiacs that know everything about mech balance? I expected a coloured chart and graph by now

Edited by Johnny Z, 06 October 2014 - 07:11 PM.

[Belorion]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 06 October 2014 - 07:03 PM, said:

Not everyone runs meta. Today is literally the first time ive ever tried a meta build and Ive been here since day 1 CB



then dont put an e?

I always just said lrms and lbxs - no es

Then it looks like part of the acronym...

After watching this:



I decided the English language has no moral high ground on how to pluralize words.

Edited by Belorion, 06 October 2014 - 07:08 PM.

[Scratx]

Victor Morson, on 06 October 2014 - 06:21 PM, said:

You need to wake up if you think this isn't part of the process.

Getting rid of arm lock, changing weapon balance [The REAL key], and then making 'mechs have a whole new set of build restrictions (but still allowing for a huge amount of customization).. these are good things.

MW4 had a good thing going with it's hardpoint system, and MW:O has a good thing going by overlaying hardpoints onto core rules. I think it's time to take another que from what worked and bring that in.

Frankly this isn't even about stopping certain weapon combinations for me, as much as it is making the different variants and chassis matter more, and be more diverse, which will help shake up gameplay dramatically.

I think you're missing part of the picture here.

The discussion on this thread seems to be running on two trains of thought.

1 - Those who look at sized hardpoints as a mean to increase diversity
2 - Those who do so as a means to replace Ghost Heat.

So, gently wake up to this fact and see that I was mainly addressing #2 here, while also rebuking those at #1 for two different reasons. Those being:

1 - The quirk pass will probably have the desired effect to begin with
2 - How many players do you really think are going to take it in the <ahem> gladly when they see that half or more of their mechs now have "INVALID" written all over and must rebuild them from scratch? Even if they were about as far from any sort of "meta" as they could get?

Think about it for a moment. Ghost Heat has nothing on the rage that will overcome the player base if that happens. I can't even imagine PGI will take that route for that reason alone.

And my frustration is showing rather badly right now, because those who are wanting to use this idea to replace Ghost Heat are not actually thinking or are completely myopic to the bigger picture. This idea does nothing to stop or punish anyone from firing all their weapons at the same time. Nothing. Therefore, all it would do is shift the meta to mechs whose stock builds and hardpoint restrictions would best match the ideal of dishing out ridiculous alphas. Especially if they're pin-point. Ghost Heat actually fights this, whether people like to admit it or not, even though it leaves a lot to be desired on multiple fronts.

Please understand where I'm coming from, here. The thought of having half my mechs invalidated because of this horrifies me. I don't do cookie cutter builds, I don't go to Smurfy and check the most popular builds. I do everything by myself. And I like it. And for no good reason I'd suddenly have to rebuild most of my mechs?

I have no polite words for that scenario that I could possibly utter in public without getting the mods called down on me. So, I shall not say anything further.

To me, /thread.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Belorion, on 06 October 2014 - 07:08 PM, said:

Then it looks like part of the acronym...

After watching this:



I decided the English language has no moral high ground on how to pluralize words.

lol meh it was just weird

Scratx, on 06 October 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

2 - How many players do you really think are going to take it in the <ahem> gladly when they see that half or more of their mechs now have "INVALID" written all over and must rebuild them from scratch? Even if they were about as far from any sort of "meta" as they could get?

especially given how fun it is to build in ui 2.0

Scratx, on 06 October 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

Think about it for a moment. Ghost Heat has nothing on the rage that will overcome the player base if that happens. I can't even imagine PGI will take that route for that reason alone.

Not choosing to do something because of possible anger is worse than doing it anyways when told not to. Because now theyre showing fear

[Hoax415]

I don't even know what this thread is about if it isn't about using MW4 system + stock builds + crit space to limit which weapons a mech can use. You know some kind of actual system not just more arbitrary "balance" to things that are "too powerful".

If you don't care about a systemic change to the way hardpoints are determined then just make up special rules. More negative quirks. Whatever.

Stalkers can't into PPC. Because reasons.

This mech can't Gauss. Because reasons.

That's stupid. It does nothing and its a waste of time. Its no different from what we've been doing, which is nerf the weapons or the variants that are most effective FLD pinpoint alpha delivery systems at the time.

You can attempt to address why FLD pinpoint alpha builds are the end all be all or you are just blowing smoke up your own ass.

As long as the game plays like it does now. That kind of build will always be king because instantaneous pinpoint alpha can't be beat as a method for winning MWO games.

Edited by Hoax415, 06 October 2014 - 07:30 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Scratx, on 06 October 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

To me, /thread.

um... kthxbai?

[Belorion]

Scratx, on 06 October 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

I think you're missing part of the picture here.

The discussion on this thread seems to be running on two trains of thought.

1 - Those who look at sized hardpoints as a mean to increase diversity
2 - Those who do so as a means to replace Ghost Heat.

The only way I see that ghost heat could ever be replaced is turning all weapons into dps rof weapons. Hard point limitations are certainly not the way to go there, since some stock builds are the offending builds.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Hoax415, on 06 October 2014 - 07:19 PM, said:

You can attempt to address why FLD pinpoint alpha builds are the end all be all or you are just blowing smoke up your own ass.

Thats a hell of a trick

But at the same time; You cant fire 3 gauss (even though we have been able to since the illya/sataphract came in) because: reasons

Gauss has a charge because reasons

lol

[Johnny Z]

Scratx, on 06 October 2014 - 07:14 PM, said:

I think you're missing part of the picture here.

The discussion on this thread seems to be running on two trains of thought.

1 - Those who look at sized hardpoints as a mean to increase diversity
2 - Those who do so as a means to replace Ghost Heat.

So, gently wake up to this fact and see that I was mainly addressing #2 here, while also rebuking those at #1 for two different reasons. Those being:

1 - The quirk pass will probably have the desired effect to begin with
2 - How many players do you really think are going to take it in the &lt;ahem&gt; gladly when they see that half or more of their mechs now have &quot;INVALID&quot; written all over and must rebuild them from scratch? Even if they were about as far from any sort of &quot;meta&quot; as they could get?

Think about it for a moment. Ghost Heat has nothing on the rage that will overcome the player base if that happens. I can't even imagine PGI will take that route for that reason alone.

And my frustration is showing rather badly right now, because those who are wanting to use this idea to replace Ghost Heat are not actually thinking or are completely myopic to the bigger picture. This idea does nothing to stop or punish anyone from firing all their weapons at the same time. Nothing. Therefore, all it would do is shift the meta to mechs whose stock builds and hardpoint restrictions would best match the ideal of dishing out ridiculous alphas. Especially if they're pin-point. Ghost Heat actually fights this, whether people like to admit it or not, even though it leaves a lot to be desired on multiple fronts.

Please understand where I'm coming from, here. The thought of having half my mechs invalidated because of this horrifies me. I don't do cookie cutter builds, I don't go to Smurfy and check the most popular builds. I do everything by myself. And I like it. And for no good reason I'd suddenly have to rebuild most of my mechs?

I have no polite words for that scenario that I could possibly utter in public without getting the mods called down on me. So, I shall not say anything further.

To me, /thread.

Good point. I dont think anyone really wants to rebuild all their mechs to much, although it may be fun to see what a new system would bring if it was done right.

Again the biggest bonus for this is that all the variants could possibly become more viable than currently. If it plays into role warfare and game balance on the plus side, then great, the main reasons for doing sized hard points are in.