637 replies to this topic

[Kirkland Langue]

Vaderman, on 28 October 2014 - 08:17 PM, said:

What would really bring people in is the tackle mechanic they took out.

Mech Bowling Online was awesome.

/sarcasm

It WAS awesome. It actually made players think of themselves as big stompy robots instead of ethereal ghosts running through each other.


People point to stun locking with 4-5 mechs ganging up on someone as a form of griefing. yes, but at the same time that is 4-5 mechs vs 1 mech. What's needed is a self-destruction button which does damage to nearby mechs - THAT would take care of the gang up. The mechanic needed some changes - but the game was a lot better in CB with knockdowns than it is today with cockpit shaking/blinding and UI 2.0.

[Inti Raymi]

The problem right now is not really (IMO) a problem with the weapon system. Rather, the issue is with things like narc, tag, ecm and radar dep. Particularly on open maps (caustic, for example).

Since the new rewards, every mech on the planet is running, at a bare minimum, tag and LRMs and I can't tell you how many matches I've been in where there are 4 mechs on one side or the other running around narc'ed. It's silly but that's the way to max your score.

If you don't play that way, you'll be lucky to break 1000 xp and 150k C-Bills on a win.

The new reward system proves the Law of Unintended Consequences. The people who thought them up should go into government work.

[Kjudoon]

Kirkland Langue, on 28 October 2014 - 08:36 PM, said:

It WAS awesome. It actually made players think of themselves as big stompy robots instead of ethereal ghosts running through each other.


People point to stun locking with 4-5 mechs ganging up on someone as a form of griefing. yes, but at the same time that is 4-5 mechs vs 1 mech. What's needed is a self-destruction button which does damage to nearby mechs - THAT would take care of the gang up. The mechanic needed some changes - but the game was a lot better in CB with knockdowns than it is today with cockpit shaking/blinding and UI 2.0.

PGI has already said no to damaging self destruct and yes to eject, coming with CW.

That said, collision should be tonnage based, and the ability to fight prone, like in TT allowed. So that little Jenner slams into an atlas, HE takes the most damage and is more likely to crumble to the ground while the atlas stomps him flat. The next time a spider butt hugs a Stalker who decides to back up, it moves over the little 30 ton piece of fluff like a bulldozer on a Yugo. If you get knocked to the ground, fine, fight from there. torso twist and shoot those near you till they back off, THEN get up. It's no longer guaranteed stun lock and pile on time to the defenseless mech because it won't be defenseless.

So yes to collisions and knockdown and death from above, with the ability to fight prone with damage and the chance for knockdown determined by weight and movement modifiers. That's what I want to see.

Edited by Kjudoon, 28 October 2014 - 08:47 PM.

[Vaderman]

Kirkland Langue, on 28 October 2014 - 08:36 PM, said:

It WAS awesome. It actually made players think of themselves as big stompy robots instead of ethereal ghosts running through each other.


People point to stun locking with 4-5 mechs ganging up on someone as a form of griefing. yes, but at the same time that is 4-5 mechs vs 1 mech. What's needed is a self-destruction button which does damage to nearby mechs - THAT would take care of the gang up. The mechanic needed some changes - but the game was a lot better in CB with knockdowns than it is today with cockpit shaking/blinding and UI 2.0.

Someone ask Russ how he feels about knockdown lol.

[YueFei]

Kjudoon, on 28 October 2014 - 08:46 PM, said:

PGI has already said no to damaging self destruct and yes to eject, coming with CW.

That said, collision should be tonnage based, and the ability to fight prone, like in TT allowed. So that little Jenner slams into an atlas, HE takes the most damage and is more likely to crumble to the ground while the atlas stomps him flat. The next time a spider butt hugs a Stalker who decides to back up, it moves over the little 30 ton piece of fluff like a bulldozer on a Yugo. If you get knocked to the ground, fine, fight from there. torso twist and shoot those near you till they back off, THEN get up. It's no longer guaranteed stun lock and pile on time to the defenseless mech because it won't be defenseless.

So yes to collisions and knockdown and death from above, with the ability to fight prone with damage and the chance for knockdown determined by weight and movement modifiers. That's what I want to see.

I'd love to see this.

Collisions should follow from a more robust physics model.

There has to be a way for players to brace against impacts and resist them. Especially for slower mechs, because they *can't* get away and prevent smaller mechs from simply ramming them.

At the same time, I don't want every collision to be resolved in a way that the winner of the collision is simply the bigger mech. That's not even how it works in real life, in the NFL. Sure, a Running Back picking up a Blitzing Linebacker might get his socks rocked, but he's usually not knocked to the ground even if he does get knocked backward.

The ability to compensate for impacts and maintain balance should be put into it as well.

But I don't think we're gonna get such a robust physics model for collisions any time soon.

[Kirkland Langue]

Vaderman, on 28 October 2014 - 08:48 PM, said:

Someone ask Russ how he feels about knockdown lol.

He had 5 or 6 mechs just griefing him. Of course it's going to not be fun. Players do basically the same thing today with Clan LRM at point blank - just to blur the player's screen because it leads to rage.

I really should just create a YouTube video showing 5 minutes of blur, shaking, and blindness - It would be easy to do since so many weapons incorporate that nonsense.

[Kjudoon]

Kirkland Langue, on 28 October 2014 - 09:01 PM, said:

He had 5 or 6 mechs just griefing him. Of course it's going to not be fun. Players do basically the same thing today with Clan LRM at point blank - just to blur the player's screen because it leads to rage.

I really should just create a YouTube video showing 5 minutes of blur, shaking, and blindness - It would be easy to do since so many weapons incorporate that nonsense.

I'm all for removing the non-lore component of cockpit shake from the game.

[Corbon Zackery]

Some issues being discussed.

Leg splash damage.
Angle of launch.
Angle of downward return.
Angle of downward return when spotted by a Light mech
Angle of downward return when spotted by a UAV.
Light mech spot bonus given by UAV.
LRM curving over rocks
LRM curving around rocks
Spread pattern of LRM 5
Speed of missiles
AMS buff do to speed increase of missiles
Cooldown rate of LRM 5 link fired.
Lock on bug were missiles tones Red and shoots them into the ground.
Cover at some point we like to be able to use something smaller than a ten story building.
Indirect fire of missiles (Since you can't see were the missles will hit the spread pattern should be massive even with a light mech spot assist.)
Direct line of sight missile fire. (Hello I can see you so my missiles should hit in a tight pattern.)
Splitting up missile hardpoints into LRM and SRM points.
I will add AMS system shooting down SRM, NARC Beacons and streak Missiles. (Since its a Anti missile system it should shoot down all missiles. This is why so many SRM builds and NARC builds are working right now.)
Ammo restrictions (So you can't just slap 10tons of ammo into your mech.)

(Its a touchie subject push LRM to far you ruin the game. We saw that in closed beta PGI almost killed the game.)

Right now if Paul is still doing weapons balance then. LRM lollapalooza will still happen until Russ who is a big brawler fan steps in and fixes it all at a later date and time.

There are so many missile mechs now that were seeing about 100 to 150 LRM tubes per game. 12 mechs each with a avg. of 1 LRM 10.

This makes for some pretty sporty game play.

Edited by Corbon Zackery, 28 October 2014 - 09:25 PM.

[dwwolf]

As someone who has played maybe 10 matches after last patch(mostly ppc adder) and getting penalized for it ,I zay : no Russ YOU FIX THE DAMN CARROT YOU HOLD INFRONT OF THE PLAYERS FIRST.

Its the damn NEW xp and cbill reward structure that let to increased LRM use.

Edited by dwwolf, 28 October 2014 - 11:08 PM.

[Mystere]

Kjudoon, on 28 October 2014 - 06:11 PM, said:

Yeppers. And I suspect you're being facetious.

I do want them back.

Edited by Mystere, 28 October 2014 - 11:28 PM.

[Kjudoon]

dwwolf, on 28 October 2014 - 10:49 PM, said:

As someone who has played maybe 10 matches after last patch(mostly ppc adder) I zay : no Russ YOU FIX THE DAMN CARROT YOU HOLD INFRONT OF THE PLAYERS FIRST.

Its the damn NEW xp and cbill reward structure that let to increased LRM use.

Because it encouraged team play and role warfare. Presto Chango! There is no problem because... THERE NEVER WAS A PROBLEM!!!. Tada!

[Carl Wrede]

Oh goddie, we are talking about LRMs.

Then we should start with why isnt the bug fixed yet that makes your first couple of salvoes go into the ground even when you have a solid lockon?

Then we can continue with the bug to AMS that has been here since day 1 when AMS was introduced. Namely that they shoot through terrain.

And after that we can start to talk about ECM.. and that discussion will actually never end

[Kjudoon]

Carl Wrede, on 29 October 2014 - 12:50 AM, said:

Oh goddie, we are talking about LRMs.

Then we should start with why isnt the bug fixed yet that makes your first couple of salvoes go into the ground even when you have a solid lockon?

Then we can continue with the bug to AMS that has been here since day 1 when AMS was introduced. Namely that they shoot through terrain.

And after that we can start to talk about ECM.. and that discussion will actually never end

Nothing to see here... walk away... just a traffic accident... nobody is at fault. Accidents happen alllllll the time. Nicest village in all England. For the greater good...

[Moonlander]

Inti Raymi, on 28 October 2014 - 08:44 PM, said:

If you don't play that way, you'll be lucky to break 1000 xp and 150k C-Bills on a win.

This is the furthest from the truth.

[Turist0AT]

and the nerfing cycle continues. I remember when i started playing in open beta and we were at the same place we are now with missiles and all except that now we have ghost heat, cant say the gameplay has improved. If paul were to keep the OPness of IS mechs from the old times then they would not need to nerf clans into the ground.

Thanks for the Ghost heat devs.


Why do we even bother, we arnt getting paid for this. sry im overeacting. Gona go play something else.

Edited by Turist0AT, 29 October 2014 - 02:40 AM.

[Bigbacon]

fixed hard points would be a death sentence.....they better not do that, they can't be that stupid.

honestly...LRMs are fine. they could do some tweaks but if they drastically change them...pretty sure they'd piss off a lot of the solo queue players....but normally the nerfs hurt them the most so the comp players can get their way.

I don't boat, but i'd stop using a paid for hero mech and my maddog prime if LRMs are killed off.

if they went fixed weapon points, I'd quit altogether. Don't turn this into mech warrior 4 but worse.

Edited by Bigbacon, 29 October 2014 - 03:50 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Kitty Bacon, on 28 October 2014 - 10:28 AM, said:

we SERIOUSLY need to stop asking for nerfs and look into alternatives. AMS is a HUGE under-performer in MWO right now and it makes that 1.5 tons useless on every mech, despite how it can shoot down LRMs. I will give you an example of why AMS needs to be buff'd. A few nights ago, me and a few of my LRM friends were running a narcing Raven with 2 LRM 40 Catapults and an LRM stalker. We were playing like normal, positioning correctly and looking for locks. But, the enemy team had 3 dual AMS mechs, 2 Jesters and a Summoner, who were giving AMS cover for their team. We got a narc on an atlas and the AMS was shooting down a great deal of missiles.. yet, it felt like it was useless for them on our end. That was 6 AMS in total shooting down LRMs as they came in and it felt like for the LRM mechs that it was pointless.

AMS needs to be buff'd, LRMs do not need nerfs.

IT absolutely WAS helping, 6x AMS shoots down a lot of missiles.

Do you think that 9 tons of AMS should completely negate ~70 tons of launcher and ammo? Why?

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 29 October 2014 - 04:54 AM.

[Bigbacon]

YueFei, on 28 October 2014 - 08:54 PM, said:

I'd love to see this.

Collisions should follow from a more robust physics model.

i'd be very happy if collisions just worked in general instead of just warping you to some random location next to the mech you just ran into, most of the time leaving you wondering where the enemy guy ended up. I hate that.

[Vaderman]

The recent changes to cbills rewards has kind of shown the effects of indirect fire that I've pointed out a few times before.

Right now if you step out of cover and don't have ecm you're getting lurm gang-banged by 6+ enemies. I know I know LTP, I suck, use that magical cover etc etc.

The only argument I have against that is that I was the one participating in this. I don't know how many mechs I indirectly took down by spotting but in one game I had 28 spotting assists.

Reduce indirect fire usage to 2-3 mechs and make ecm only affect the mech carrying it. This would make lurms viable and restrict ecm effects.

[Joseph Mallan]

I just realized, This mythical Nerf has no threat to my my non LRM using Mech.

Doesn't mean I want to see a Nerf happen though.