146 replies to this topic

[EDMW CSN]

Leave circle strafing in. I am a TT purist and a Mechwarrior as well.

Firstly, It is should not be overly effective in MWO because only arm weapons have free floating aim.
There bound to be some misses here and there due to lag.

Secondly, energy weapons are largely no longer instant hit. Med lasers and Small lasers boats were popular with circle strafers back then because all the damage was front loaded, now with a Jenner running at 117 kph, your lasers will go around the general target.

Thirdly, you are still in a team, a circle strafer is putting his cross hairs all on you and close to you in fact. Thus leaving him open to blows from everyone.

This is different from the standard MW4 where so many JJ mechs are poptarts or hill humpers with sniper weapons that leave little room for retaliation unless you are using ballistic arc weapons. A circle strafer has to be close and that opens him to all sort of damage.


Just saying my piece.

[william kane]

I'm for circle strafing, not sure why is this even a debate. The torso twist exist for a reason.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

PewPew, on 28 June 2012 - 07:14 PM, said:

To reduce the dominance of the strategy

In a simulator

...yeah

[PewPew]

the

Quote

To reduce the dominance of the strategy and encourage a greater variety of more complex strategies.

A simulator is a model of reality. I think we can agree that reality is more complex than models, yeah? And that a better model would thus be more complex.

Edited by PewPew, 28 June 2012 - 07:38 PM.

[Coolant]

I want there to be all kinds of strategy and all kinds of tactics, but when I read, "stop circle-strafing" I can't help but think of jump-sniping and how those that like to do it can get annoyed at those that won't get drawn into doing it. Circle of Death can be the bane of jump-snipers and is a legitimate counter-tactic against it. I will use long range if the map dictates it, but I will use circle-strafing every chance I get.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

PewPew, on 28 June 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:

the

A simulator is a model of reality. I think we can agree that reality is more complex than models, yeah? And that a better model would thus be more complex.

Yeah lol, lets artificially stop circle strafing, I guess we make it so mechs HAVE to move in a straight line when they get near another mech, then we stop Jump sniping, pop tarting, legging (oh by the way do you stop headshotting and coring after that?), what would be allowed by your rules then?

Im sorry but there is a rule: alls fair in love and war and Im gonna by living by that one first

Edited by 514yer, 28 June 2012 - 07:46 PM.

[Twisted Power]

Let me get this right. The op wants to do more damage at close range. To encurage the building of low armor high damage burst builds with anti radar detect on fast moving scouts mech who can come up behind you and kill you before you can turn around?

What?

So you do not want anybody to ever play an assualt mech because they can't turn?

[PewPew]

514yer, on 28 June 2012 - 07:45 PM, said:

Yeah lol, lets artificially stop circle strafing, I guess we make it so mechs HAVE to move in a straight line when they get near another mech, then we stop Jump sniping, pop tarting, legging (oh by the way do you stop headshotting and coring after that?), what would be allowed by your rules then?

I'm really glad you're defending circle strafing so passionately, but I'm not sure you've actually read anything.

The proposed damage models would actually reduce pop-tarting by making it more dangerous to stay in place allowing other mechs to maneuver close to you. The entire point of increased damage at closer range is to make close quarters combat better. Circle strafing will INEVITABLY exist, but with the changes, it won't be the ONLY thing to do.

Twisted Power, on 28 June 2012 - 07:47 PM, said:

Let me get this right. The op wants to do more damage at close range. To encurage the building of low armor high damage burst builds with anti radar detect on fast moving scouts mech who can come up behind you and kill you before you can turn around?

What?

So you do not want anybody to ever play an assualt mech because they can't turn?

"Increase damage" does not mean "increase damage by 100x"
Yes, it will increase the appeal of ganker mechs that have low armor, high damage, and stealth. That, in turn, increases the appeal of scouting and light mechs.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

PewPew, on 28 June 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:

I'm really glad you're defending circle strafing so passionately, but I'm not sure you've actually read anything.

Yeah sorry, I was talking about the game as is not what you were proposed changes were about.
So in that case, I wasnt reading that, no, I was asking if we keep artificially removing viable strategies from the game, where do you draw the line?

[Rooster68W]

I would like to have the powerof a weapon be somewhat determindby range. Whether it be near or far. Just like it is in other dos especially in bf3 where bullet drop comes into play. I feel it would add a bit more realism into the game. I do not think this would reduce or hinder circle straying at all. In fact I think it would almost incurage it even more. Because it is just a game and not real life you see tactics that people would normally not do or even try. In games the bigger the risk the bigger reward, and the greater chance if catchingyour enemies with their pants down. So with no fear of real death a small mech would cgarge/circle the large much for the potential kill.

[EDMW CSN]

Why are we even artificially suggesting boosting damage at close close range combat or light mechs taking less dmg from larger calibre weapons like AC-20s ?

The devs have already compensated this partly some what with modules that can assist or help in your style of gameplay, and not to mention that using the same mech repeatedly will unlock more traits and quirks of that design.

Adding more arbitrary balancing effects results in only waaay too many artificial constraints on such a game itself.

Edited by EDMW CSN, 28 June 2012 - 08:00 PM.

[Rooster68W]

Sorry for spelling inaccuracies, I did this on my phone.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

EDMW CSN, on 28 June 2012 - 07:59 PM, said:

Why are we even artificially suggesting boosting damage at close close range combat or light mechs taking less dmg from larger calibre weapons like AC-20s ?

The devs have already compensated this partly some what with modules that can assist or help in your style of gameplay, and not to mention that using the same mech repeatedly will unlock more traits and quirks of that design.

Adding more arbitrary balancing effects results in only waaay too many artificial constraints on such a game itself.

Yeah plus the more damage closer up would do the opposite of what youre looking to do... the closer you are the more damage you do? Great, load me up with medium lasers an a fast mech an Im gonna go barber stripe me an atlas

[CmdrSpider]

I've used the Circle of Death since the very first Mechwarrior came out. Like everyone says you do what works. That being said I'd like to see the game evolve to where players truly could us strategy as a way of winning the battle. And I also see some was that might me accomplished. A C3 system setup in a lance with long range weapons (i.e. LRMs, Guass Rifles, PPCs) and a fast and sturdy scout could potentially rain down significant damage on an approaching lance. Afterwards there probably wouldn't be much of a circle dance. Another thing that could be done would be to give mechs in heavy cover added protection just as they have in the board game. Harder to detect, harder to hit could make trying a circle dance a tough option to complete. Regardless were all going to be looking for what tactic or strategy works best.

Good Hunting,

CmdrSpider

[Sertsa]

Once upon a time skill using JJ's and dfa's was a major factor besides just the skill at leading and aiming a weapon in circles and using cover and pop ups to get missles off before dropping back behind cover. Although just going in circles back then took a lot of skill with the lag involved.

As far as the circle of death being old yeah it was but when the game first came out if someone seriously used to go into that mode against a few people knew what they were doing with JJ's you'd get pounded on the head, legged, or ate up basically.

I seriously doubt I might like coming back to the game again unless JJ's go back to the MechII level, was one of the reasons I quit playing to begin with long ago.

A fast estimate of putting your feet on your mechs face in a a C1 laser battle or the mobility you had being in a C3 lasers/ missle battle was what made the game a test of skill rather than just running around each other in a circle, give me a break.

I know some of the most fun I had was doing torso twists and dogfight type things in the air in a 2 on 2 laser battle with TW's in the air with JJ's.

When they nerfed those I thought the game took a big hit to begin with.

*shrug*

Have to see I guess.

I'd love to see the game alive and kicking like it used to be long ago, but I doubt I'm plonking down for the big money version on something I haven't seen or tried out like many games in the past, money just too tight these days.

Edited by Sertsa, 28 June 2012 - 08:13 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

The doubled armor thing comes into play here too if they decide to go that way too

[PewPew]

514yer, on 28 June 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

Yeah sorry, I was talking about the game as is not what you were proposed changes were about.
So in that case, I wasnt reading that, no, I was asking if we keep artificially removing viable strategies from the game, where do you draw the line?

1. There is no reason why adjusting gameplay has a slippery-slope effect where everything is suddenly gone.
2. Again, this does not remove circle strafing as a viable strategy. Read again.
3. You should know that "artificial" manipulation of a game is exactly what game balance is. People will always find the best way to play a game. That is the metagame. If the metagame is too simple and stagnates, then the problem lies in the game.

EDMW CSN, on 28 June 2012 - 07:59 PM, said:

Why are we even artificially suggesting boosting damage at close close range combat or light mechs taking less dmg from larger calibre weapons like AC-20s ?

The devs have already compensated this partly some what with modules that can assist or help in your style of gameplay, and not to mention that using the same mech repeatedly will unlock more traits and quirks of that design.

Adding more arbitrary balancing effects results in only waaay too many artificial constraints on such a game itself.

What's proposed is NOT reducing damage to lights, but manipulating damage so that it effects different mechs differently following pre-existing rules. Please see prior example.

514yer, on 28 June 2012 - 08:02 PM, said:

Yeah plus the more damage closer up would do the opposite of what youre looking to do... the closer you are the more damage you do? Great, load me up with medium lasers an a fast mech an Im gonna go barber stripe me an atlas

It doesn't have to be as simple as "MORE DAMAGE". Use a little bit of creativity. Check the graphs out http://mwomercs.com/...ange-on-damage/ Weapons like lasers would pretty much remain the same while weapons that are MEANT for close range would have better performance at close range. That way, people don't choose to fight at close range because their weapon can only shoot at short range, but because it's advantageous to do so.

[Sabastion]

for a little of perspective: Circle of Death has its place in real life. Look at any air dogfight circia WWII to Korean War. Typical maneuver when someone is tailing another was to turn tighter and tighter in a circle. It still happens today don't see why it wouldn't be there 1037 years from now.

[Sertsa]

Sabastion, on 28 June 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:

for a little of perspective: Circle of Death has its place in real life. Look at any air dogfight circia WWII to Korean War. Typical maneuver when someone is tailing another was to turn tighter and tighter in a circle. It still happens today don't see why it wouldn't be there 1037 years from now.

For a little more perspective, that was circa WWII Korean War.

I doubt anyone in current times is doing a circle of death type of aerial combat.

Unless it's a UAV.

Edited by Sertsa, 28 June 2012 - 08:23 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Quote

People will always find the best way to play a game. That is the metagame. If the metagame is too simple and stagnates, then the problem lies in the game.

uh I thought figuring out the best way to play the game was THE GAME not the metagame

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Metagaming

Yeah like that says, I always thought metagame was everything that happens outside the game. Like how in EVE thats like 50% of the game lol

Edited by 514yer, 28 June 2012 - 08:29 PM.