Jump to content

Open Letter: If I Could Change Mwo In A Day


12 replies to this topic

Poll: Give your opinion! (16 member(s) have cast votes)

Do the ideas in this post make sense to you?

  1. Yes, absolutely! (2 votes [12.50%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 12.50%

  2. Most do, but a couple don't. (preferably explain in a reply) (3 votes [18.75%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 18.75%

  3. Most don't, but a couple do. (preferably explain in a reply) (7 votes [43.75%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 43.75%

  4. Pssh, no way - not even a *little*. Also, I hate bacon. (4 votes [25.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 25.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Telmasa

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 15 January 2015 - 01:49 AM

If I could magically make anything happen, in a single day, to make MWO better, the following is what I would do.

You may look at this as a list of grievances, a set of objectives in the future I want to see, or a rage-fueled wall of text - I won't judge. Just simply offer some consideration for what I have to say.


1. Hit registration

It's clear as day that the system for seeing where hits register on enemy mechs is not 100% reliable, understandable, and predictable. This makes it very difficult to reliably understand and enjoy this game.

I do not personally know the particulars of what causes hit registration errors (lag? hitboxes? mech speed? server framerates? clientside issues?), but this would be my top priority to fix. In my fantasy world, I would wave my wand, and magically:
- Hitboxes on all mechs will definitely not have weird front-to-back sections (sections looking straight down upon a mech notwithstanding)
- Collision models on every map for every single building, rock, tree, and so on will fit perfectly to what is visually displayed on the screen
- "Lagshield" (whether from internet or from moving at high speeds) made to be nonexistent; if you visually see a weapon hit a mech, it hits a mech exactly where you see it hit
- Short Range Missile hit registration won't be wonky (I'll admit, I do not know the particulars of how SRM missile hits are calculated, but I swear when I use SRMs oftentimes I will see missiles visually miss/impact thin air, and yet still damage the mech I fired it at)

2. Consumable-Warrior-Online

I have two*** solutions for the mass use of consumables to direct the flow of any given match:
- Remove consumables altogether. Introduce coolant flush MW4-style, comes at the same fixed amount on all mechs, for free. Refund all GXP/cbills/MC(or equivalent c-bill value) invested in consumable-related modules and the actual consumables themselves.
- Remove mechs from the game. Give everybody stripped-out Locusts and unlimited consumables to use as much as they please, with minimal cooldown for air/arty strikes. Rebrand MW:O to CW:O, or alternately, SW:O (strikewarrior online).

***A more balanced & less personally biased approach:
- Air/artillery strikes can absolutely NOT do damage to head components, ever, because it's not okay for a player to hit a summon-near-instant-damage button & instantly kill any given mech on the field, even if it's a perceivably small chance
- Air/artillery strike cooldown increased by at least 200%, *including* time between smoke pop & shell impacts, and including the duration of the strike itself (shell impacts spread out over a longer period of time)
- Air/artillery strike 'area of effect' radius increased by 50%, rather than shells being clustered so tightly; splash radius increased slightly (10%, say) to compensate somewhat
- UAV hitbox size increased
- UAV range decreased to 200m (with pilot module, 240m)
- UAV 'elevation' above battlefield reduced
- UAV moves around some, to compensate
- Coolant flush prices reduced by 50% for all versions


3. Quirks

Flat ceiling on summed weapon quirk strength at a 25% cap, and a 12.5% cap on individual weapon quirk strength. I.E.: Dragon-1N no longer firing AC5s at twice the speed of a normal mech; Thunderbolt-9S no longer able to fire ERPPCs at half heat (almost less than a large laser); Firestarter-S would take 5% more heat from MPLs than currently (significant change for a light mech).
***Exceptions to the rule***
-Current 50% summed cap/25% individual cap stays for quirks applied to a weapon on a mech with only a *single* hardpoint for that weapon's type (though not all mechs currently have quirks for those single hardpoints), i.e. Locust-1V.


4. Maps

- Expanded borders on all maps
- Old maps redrawn/enhanced
- Small clutter either destructible or completely pass-through (both mechs and weaponry), including trees and statues and so on
- All map environs and hitboxes match up exactly to visibly rendered objects (i.e. HPG pyramid and satellite dish, anybody?)
- Spawns totally reworked and rebalanced (I would lean towards starting lances off closer together and farther from the enemy, but I'll admit there is a science to spawn balance and that I do not know the specifics)
- Turret sensors 'nerfed' by acting like normal mech sensors, instead of currently (i.e. no LRM turrets instantly locking at 1000m out; if there is a spotter, then can lock at 1000m, but otherwise would require target to be within 800m or whatever normal sensor range is)


5. Weapons & Equipment
This gets a little ramble-y and varied, bear with me:

-AC/2 (all variants) ghost heat penalties reduced by half

-Flamer heat reduced, heat generated on target reduced slightly & capped at 90% (works like environmental heat), treated as laser machine gun, does damage at roughly 60% of machine guns (exact numbers for proper balance are beyond me, but I'm sure it's been discussed and information is available in other threads)

-Additional ghost heat penalty if more than 4 weapons of *any* kind are fired simultaneously, not anywhere as drastic as other heat penalties, but stacks on top of current ghost heat penalties; helps discourage "laser-barf-alpha-strike"-meta builds that currently circumvent ghost heat rules (with compensating quirks added to the Nova Prime arms & Hunchback-4P, as these two chassi would suffer drastically if played with semi-stock builds)

- Clan StreakSRM ranges reduced to 300; possibly include regular clan SRM range buffed to 300, as a partial compensation to clan short range missile capabilities

- Clan StreakSRM-6 linked ghost heat penalties apply starting on third, instead of fourth, launcher; helps discourage "alpha-streakSRM-stormcrow/mad dog"-meta builds without rendering them ineffective

- Remove SRM "splash" damage, if it still exists

- Artemis, BAP, TAG, and NARC each provide smaller individual buffs to missile lock-on time (so it's more important to use all four pieces of equipment together for full LRM effectiveness, which has good implications for all the LRM-skill level debates elsewhere on the forums)

- ECM no longer acts as IFF jammer (enemy mechs are visually identified by mechs, similar to modern-day air to air cameras) - so if enemy is visible, a red triangle will appear & is targetable, but no detailed target info will appear if under ECM protection; additionally, with aforementioned change to LRM lock-on buffs, ECM will effectively make missile lock take longer to achieve than it currently does, which serves to compensate loss of IFF jamming
(in other words, make it work the way it did on MW4)

- IFF jammer introduced, with individual tonnage/crit slot requirements, and restricted to certain chassi; also basically works the way it did on MW4: simply prevents being targeted outside of certain ranges (no red triangle), but has reduced effectiveness against BAP, does not affect target info collection, and does not affect missile lock time

- Adjustments somehow made to Gauss Rifle to prevent circumventing the charge time by any means whatsoever

- Fix Clan LBX/AC stuff so it works with interchangable ammo ingame (with functionality similar to weapon doors or chain-fire toggle) instead of current band-aid of separate weapon systems

- Consider increasing AMS effectiveness while reducing its rate of ammo consumption


6. Community Warfare

- Increased map width (same as normal maps, give more room to play) and depth behind bases
- Spawns places farther apart, and multiple places available (say, 6-12 locations, some farther away from base than others)
- Lances do not spawn at fixed locations (aside from very first spawn); whichever location is furthest away from enemy (or with least number of enemies) is chosen for next drop (to help prevent spawncamping); would require careful thought to prevent exploits
- Secondary generators removed
- Main generator health buffed to slightly more than initial levels, is given more external protection
- Turrets left as-is
- Terrain adjusted around gates (mostly flattened out); third alternate route made available which can lead to gate generators (so successful attack through this route initially can result in an opened gate & thus an additional attack route, instead of trying to find shots over gate by using terrain)
- Increase rewards for victory, to feel more tangible compared to damage farming (maybe even reduce damage-farm related faction rewards to help this mentality along); losing teams still motivated to receive more rewards by destroying enemy mechs before a losing battle ends (which would be helped by working to avoid spawncamping-meta)
- Work to improve, through any number of possible methods, matchmaking and qeue time, while simultaneously making "Solo players vs Premade" battles less likely (admittedly a tall task)


7. Pug Matchmaking

- Reduce likelihood of getting same map twice in a row, even if different game mode
- Work to balance skill levels fairly throughout teams, without negatively affecting qeue times (and do it by individual, not by summed team strength - a lance 'elite' players with two lances of newer players is not equal to a full team of slightly above-average players, a lesson that's been learned the hard way on World of Tanks)
- Try to balance out pre-made groups evenly against each other, according to size (rather than one or two small groups being tossed regularly against 12-mans); find ways to make it easier for similar-sized pre-mades to face each other without making qeue times longer



That's all I've got, you've made it to the end! I'll be taking a vaction from MW:O 'til I see a couple certain things change (arty headshots and hit registration), but by all means I'll try to check in and respond to discussion.

Edited by Telmasa, 15 January 2015 - 01:49 AM.


#2 Lily from animove

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 13,891 posts
  • LocationOn a dropship to Terra

Posted 15 January 2015 - 02:00 AM

errm, if you think, that in a single day, you would be able to do all the things above, you clearly have no idea how IT works. And all you would do is bringing out a lot of bugged and broken stuff.

#3 Telmasa

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 15 January 2015 - 02:03 AM

Would you mind actually reading the post before responding to it next time?

The entire premise of this operates on the phrase, "if I could". Obviously it's not possible to achieve such things in a day, else PGI would have a perfect game already.

#4 Egomane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,163 posts

Posted 15 January 2015 - 02:05 AM

View PostTelmasa, on 15 January 2015 - 02:03 AM, said:

Would you mind actually reading the post before responding to it next time?

The entire premise of this operates on the phrase, "if I could". Obviously it's not possible to achieve such things in a day, else PGI would have a perfect game already.

So the point of your thread is?

Magic is not part of IT development and I'm pretty sure bugs and balance are a big concern for PGI already.

#5 Karl Streiger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 20,369 posts
  • LocationBlack Dot in a Sea of Blue

Posted 15 January 2015 - 02:16 AM

View PostTelmasa, on 15 January 2015 - 02:03 AM, said:

Would you mind actually reading the post before responding to it next time?

The entire premise of this operates on the phrase, "if I could". Obviously it's not possible to achieve such things in a day, else PGI would have a perfect game already.

OK I read your list as a list of objectives - at best.
Because strictly spoken its not even a rough sketch its something before - because you simple underline goals.

Same could be said in 1 sentences: I want a perfect balanced game with accurate state of the art technology, that offer a rich experience.

View PostTelmasa, on 15 January 2015 - 02:03 AM, said:

Would you mind actually reading the post before responding to it next time?

The entire premise of this operates on the phrase, "if I could". Obviously it's not possible to achieve such things in a day, else PGI would have a perfect game already.

Depends on the definition of perfect - because when you say perfect balance - a greater being like the Creator God or Odin himself - knows how balance is achieved - if you don't?

Last not least the Poll is biased, and you hardly offer any suggestions.

#6 EvilCow

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 2,243 posts

Posted 15 January 2015 - 03:23 AM

The risk of putting so many suggestion in a SINGLE poll is to get a negative vote because I don't like SOME of the proposals.

So... no.

#7 HlynkaCG

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 1,263 posts
  • LocationSitting on a 12x multiplier and voting for Terra Therma

Posted 15 January 2015 - 04:04 AM

I don't think you have any idea how unrealistic you are being or what any of your objectives / suggestions actually mean in practice.

Your poll is also biased.

#8 generalazure

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 232 posts

Posted 15 January 2015 - 04:06 AM

imho:

1&4: will never happen due to the huge amount of work involved in setting up lag-safe hit detection for every single mesh combination in the game

2: I'd love to get rid of consumables, but "Paulconomy" I guess

3: I'd prefer generally making quirks shallower and broader (eg a 17.5% boost on all ACs instead of 25% on a specific model and 12.5% on the rest). Variety is fun.

5: I disagree with anything that contains "additional ghost heat" on principle. Bad mechanic is bad. Agree that AC2 and flamer need love. You forgot crappy machine guns.

6: No opinion, haven't played CW lately due to ridiculous wait times

7: Nah, mathematically impossible to do without increased wait times or larger player pool

So the only points that have a chance of happening are weapon and quirk rebalances and that's what most of these forums are ranting on about all the time anyways.

#9 Rokuzachi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 511 posts

Posted 15 January 2015 - 04:22 AM

Hitreg is my biggest beef with this game. Such a fundamental element of it should not frequently break. Unreliable hitreg basically renders this product a joke if it ever even had hope of being some kind of e-sport.

Other online games handle it much, much better than MWO. Why is it such a problem here?

Maps are my second beef.

Collision; dear god. Get a handle on it. So tired of my shots hitting invisible walls. Viridian Bog or w/e it's called is a great example of an overly ambitious map - if they were masters of their toolset, sure. But currently? Hell no. Please don't make more maps with tiny things to get stuck on/tons of invisible collision to soak shots. The other night I was playing in a group and one of our members got perma-stuck twice in two different matches on something we couldn't even see. I walked around him several times and couldn't see anything. I've also witnessed at least one other player get stuck on seemingly nothing. In short: Please stop making maps that are above your skill level, and fix the old ones first.

#10 Raggedyman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,278 posts
  • LocationFreedonia Institute of Mech Husbandry

Posted 15 January 2015 - 05:14 AM

View PostTelmasa, on 15 January 2015 - 01:49 AM, said:

1. Hit registration


I think they are fully aware of such a fundamental issue and will be trying to fix it/get it as close to 100% as it can be.

View PostTelmasa, on 15 January 2015 - 01:49 AM, said:

2. Consumable-Warrior-Online


Beyond your "remove all mechs" "idea"....

- A MW4 coolant flush option would be nice, but I can't see the problem of keeping coolant shots in there for extra options.
- Wider Air/Artillery AOE be nice but I can't see increasing time from smoke-to-bang helping as folks who don't move will just not move over a longer time period. The simplest solution with these is "Don't Cluster **** yourselves"

View PostTelmasa, on 15 January 2015 - 01:49 AM, said:

3. Quirks


Don't know the specific mechs in question well enough to comment on your tweaking, though I'll happily accept some loosening / tightening in another pass could be useful for all balancing as a whole. Ideally based on large number stats, rather than individual player experiences.

View PostTelmasa, on 15 January 2015 - 01:49 AM, said:

4. Maps


- How will bigger maps make things better?
- How do you want "old maps redrawn/enhanced"?
- Destructible landscape For The Win!!

View PostTelmasa, on 15 January 2015 - 01:49 AM, said:

5. Weapons & Equipment


As above: a nip & tuck would be good

View PostTelmasa, on 15 January 2015 - 01:49 AM, said:

6. Community Warfare


-Again, not sure what more width would actually achieve here.
-Not sure why the main generator needs a buff when it's already a swine to get to.
-Some change to the gates so you don't have to do the 'over the wall' shots would be nice. I mean did whoever was contracted to set up those generators really didn't know they they were going to get shot at??

View PostTelmasa, on 15 January 2015 - 01:49 AM, said:

7. Pug Matchmaking


I'm quite sure PGI know about needing to balance the teams, on the grounds that it was being yelled at them from the first day the game was but a twinkle in a developers eye. Also you want greater balance without negative time impact: that isn't going to happen, as you're going to be doing more 'pick and choose'. It's bound to slow things down, it's just how much you want it slowed down that's the deciding factor. Remember that there isn't an unlimited pool of players out there, just whoever is in the queue at that time.

#11 Mercules

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 5,136 posts
  • LocationPlymouth, MN

Posted 15 January 2015 - 08:01 AM

Most of your post is a rambling mess that touches here and there on a couple of concerns that are reasonable to see fixed.

Your suggestions for fixing them are ridiculous though. Magic indeed.

#12 Telmasa

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 1,548 posts

Posted 15 January 2015 - 04:08 PM

View PostEvilCow, on 15 January 2015 - 03:23 AM, said:

The risk of putting so many suggestion in a SINGLE poll is to get a negative vote because I don't like SOME of the proposals.

So... no.


I do believe the second and third option in the poll is available for you.

#13 Vellron2005

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood-Eye
  • The Blood-Eye
  • 5,445 posts
  • LocationIn the mechbay, telling the techs to put extra LRM ammo on.

Posted 02 November 2015 - 05:22 AM

Errr.... uuuugggghhh.... Text...wall...overwhelming...

*left topic*





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users