146 replies to this topic

[UncleKulikov]

Stray Ion, on 28 June 2012 - 06:38 PM, said:

NO do not take out the "CIRCLE OF DEATH". It takes skill to perform and make every hit land.

I've found this to be true. Even if you are the light dancing with the assault.

[Elizander]

All I really saw was a team that split up in different directions, an Atlas charging in alone to circle strafe and die without taking anyone out, enemy catapults that couldn't get into a good position to fire missiles, and enemy scouts that couldn't do anything effective due to the positioning of their heavier teammates.

It was pretty much a standard pub game and not anything close to a strategic fight. I really can't expect a random team of players to utilize proper strategy especially on a new map that just came out on a game they just started playing. Things can be adjusted later on so I don't see any need for drastic changes right now due to the very small sample size to base our opinions off.

Fights between veteran teams (of MWO, meaning used to the gameplay and familiar with all the maps and mech performances) in a 12 v 12 with each time in vent/teamspeak/mumble might be completely different and there is little to no chance to see that until sometime after the game's release. Matches with full teams always turn out differently from pub games in almost any competitive game and expecting pubs to act like professional gamers will definitely make your blood pressure rise in any pub game you join.

[Sabastion]

Sertsa, on 28 June 2012 - 08:22 PM, said:

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.

You'd be surprised

[Stray Ion]

Sertsa, on 28 June 2012 - 08:22 PM, said:

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.

Engineers thought that too. Look at the F4 phantom which was developed without any kind of machine gun. Its kill death ratio was horrid until the addition of a gunpod (yes I know it was also due to poorly working missles). To the best of my knowledge, they never made the same mistake again. The safest spot in a dog fight is still behind your opponent.

Yes I know its not on the OP's topic, but I let too much information about tactics slip in a machine gun thread. My knowledge may give me an edge or it may not, but the less who know about it increases my chances.

Edited by Stray Ion, 28 June 2012 - 08:55 PM.

[Twisted Power]

514yer, on 28 June 2012 - 08:26 PM, said:

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

LOL metagaming is not the "metagame" Metagaming is using outside tools, the metagame is the current practice of most efficent gameplay to win.

There are things in english called letters and they change words. Words 99.9% of the time have another meaning then other ones.

Edited by Twisted Power, 28 June 2012 - 09:00 PM.

[PewPew]

514yer, on 28 June 2012 - 08:26 PM, said:

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

From Wiki - "Metagamingis a broad term usually used to define any strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset," Simply, it's the game within the game that is shaped by game mechanics, player trends, and psychology.

Metagame IS the game. Every game has a metagame. It's basically unwritten strategy. Pop-tarting was once the dominant metagame in game MW. In the NBA, the metagame is focused on strong offensive players. In the NCAA, the metagame is focused on strong defensive plays. I'm not a huge basketball guy, so if someone could confirm this.

I do appreciate circle strafing in that it's much like a dogfight and gives MW a lot of character. The problem is that it becomes kind of silly when everyone kind of runs in and begins circle strafing. I'd like to see the game have more than just that, and I'm pretty sure one of the devs in a video said he would like the same thing.

Edited by PewPew, 28 June 2012 - 09:02 PM.

[verybad]

WoB Particleman, on 28 June 2012 - 06:44 PM, said:

Get rid of circle straffe, it is the number one thing that has kept the true Battletech players from really taking a hold of MW3 and 4. Making the weapons ranged will not help either, use terain and cover just like the original game.

No it didn't. COD wasn't even that popular in MW4 (another tactic, poptarting was more popular). It worked really well in MW3 because the horrible network code made lag jump in on any moving target. If you "eliminate COD" you are essentially saying "stand there and take it. COD was a natural dodge mechanism that arose beacause it increased survivability. If you remove it, you need to introduce another dodgemechanism that will work in a relatively enclosed space.

Note, lights trying to get behind assaults in the TT game are using COD.

Edited by verybad, 28 June 2012 - 09:08 PM.

[Madrix]

PewPew, on 28 June 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:

Cross-posting from http://mwomercs.com/...ange-on-damage/. Probably not an original idea, but I feel like this needs more attention.

Something I noticed in the gameplay videos is that there is still a lot of circle strafing or a linear clashing of forces. The two teams just run towards each other and then duke it out. It seems the gameplay still doesn't lend itself to more complex strategies.

Of course, it is impossible to be certain based on what we know, but discussion can only benefit us here. In addition, this has been the case for all past Mechwarrior games including the most recent MW:LL mod.

What do you guys think of the idea in the link above? To increase close range damage of certain weapons in order to make close-combat much more dangerous. If you could drop a mech much faster, there wouldn't be drawn out circle strafe matches. This would encourage smarter, stealthy maneuvering by close range mechs and make fire support mechs have to be on their toes. This would also lead to scouts being far more important to the team than just collecting locational/damage data.

Posts like this raise my blood pressure.

This game is another in a long line of games to attempt to adapt a much-loved tabletop strategy game to a real time arcade format. Almost all have failed to recreate the experience, opting instead to be a snipe-fest where people fought like they were snipers in armored suits.

It isn't world of tanks. It isn't call of duty.

To save myself the trouble of writing a multi-page missive on the point of mech combat to someone who won't read it anyway, I'll offer a single-sentence synopsis: Think of mechs as Knights without the need for horses.

[Kobold]

I don't consider circles of death to be a "tactic." Instead, they are an obvious consequence of two mechs running towards each other, then trying to keep their crosshairs on target. Neither pilot wants to stop moving (and be an immobile target for their enemy, or perhaps just as importantly, other enemies), nor does either pilot want to break out of the circle and risk exposing their back to their opponent.

This is no more a "tactic" than a general furball in WW2 dogfighting is.

[Kalenn]

Since we're restricting torso twist and aiming down, why not remove jump jets while we're at it. I hate it when people who've learned how to aim while flying through the air shoot me. It's unfair that they're better! And what's with those ppcs? Let's introduce random miss factors so people who know how to aim aren't unnaturally given an advantage over someone who hasn't figured out their mouse yet!

Where's my pitchfork!

/sarcasm

[CaptainZot]

There is no way to eliminate this. It is the dogfight of mechwarrior. It is the warfare of anyone trying to make it more difficult for someone to hit them with a ranged weapon when the enemy sees them and there is no readily available obstacle for them to hide behind. It's quite a bet less twitch intensive than actual combat.

[PewPew]

Kalenn, on 28 June 2012 - 09:29 PM, said:

Since we're restricting torso twist and aiming down, why not remove jump jets while we're at it. I hate it when people who've learned how to aim while flying through the air shoot me. It's unfair that they're better! And what's with those ppcs? Let's introduce random miss factors so people who know how to aim aren't unnaturally given an advantage over someone who hasn't figured out their mouse yet!

Where's my pitchfork!

/sarcasm

No one's proposing that. You're welcome to get angry over it, though.

I'm also not sure why everyone's assuming I want to reduce circle strafe fighting because I'm bad at it. It's too easy. I've been playing FPS games competitively for nearly 15 years. I'd like to play things with more depth.

Edited by PewPew, 28 June 2012 - 09:39 PM.

[PANZERBUNNY]

People need to learn some maneuvers to offset or mitigate circle strafing. It will be hard to eliminate it completely and is sort of a commitment when other fighting is going around you.

Exposing your back while you dance with an opponent to death will see you metal meat in no time.

[Kalenn]

PewPew, on 28 June 2012 - 09:37 PM, said:

No one's proposing that. You're welcome to get angry over it, though.

I'm also not sure why everyone's assuming I want to reduce circle strafe fighting because I'm bad at it. It's too easy. I've been playing FPS games competitively for nearly 15 years. I'd like to play things with more depth.

Guess you missed the sarcasm... My point is, why try to limit tactics that are a natural part of the game? Limiting leg shots or circle-strafing in my mind is about as realistic as limiting sniping... or whatever.

[Kenyon Burguess]

seriously, ppl need to stop watching footage of unfinished game play and suddenly decide its broken. its Beta. a beta is a skeleton of a game without anything other than raw forms. so of course the mechs are gonna rush to center and smash faces. that would be all there is programmed in. frames -->basic forms -->few weapons --> some fighting --> some stratagy --> all the fixins -->game is done

the game should be about teamwork. teamwork would be having your friends tell you he is struggling with a enemy mech and you rushing in behind the circle strafing enemy and blasting him in the armor. so circle-strafing = win if you use teamwork.

[Tenrai]

One point tha was no mentioned was as a light mech pilot in MW4 once you closed with a heavy or assault mech you were stuck there... If you did not circle-strait you were dead...Very few ways to get out of range and still be in the pilot seat!

[PewPew]

Kalenn, on 28 June 2012 - 09:53 PM, said:

Guess you missed the sarcasm... My point is, why try to limit tactics that are a natural part of the game? Limiting leg shots or circle-strafing in my mind is about as realistic as limiting sniping... or whatever.

Why do you play MW over checkers? Because it's more complex.

THE POINT IS NOT TO GET RID OF CIRCLE STRAFING COMPLETELY.
I'm not sure if people just want to get angry or they're just illiterate.

[Kalenn]

PewPew, on 28 June 2012 - 10:09 PM, said:

Why do you play MW over checkers? Because it's more complex.

THE POINT IS NOT TO GET RID OF CIRCLE STRAFING COMPLETELY.
I'm not sure if people just want to get angry or they're just illiterate.

Did I say that? I dont think so... And the passive aggressive insult is uncalled for. But just in case i'm not the only illiterate person here, what I was (sarcastically) saying is that imposing artificial game mechanics (such as, for example, arbitrary damage boosters, or arbitrary statistical 'misses') to mitigate things that people do that you don't like seems a little lame. Since you're saying you don't like it because it's too simple, then don't do it! Dazzle us all with your tactical wizardry if thats what you would prefer. i personally think dancing around my opponent while trying to dodge their and other players' shots while giving back as good as I'm getting is kind of fun... As is sniping, or pop-tarting or (gasp) crippling your opponent when you have an opportunity. Point is, why take something out of someone's tactical toolkit?

[Death Jester]

@Pewpew I understand your desire for more complexity and more skilled play and better tactics. I don't understand the desire to monkey with how damage is currently done on a game we haven't even seen the completed form of yet. I know everyone is bored and I know everyone is excited to play the game but can we hold off on picking things apart until after we find out there is even a problem? And on the subject of Circle Strafing - Don't like it? Practice with your team and punish those that use is it against you. Let them circle and while they are dog fighting with you get your buddy in behind and pound away at that nice soft rear armour.

[PewPew]

Kalenn, on 28 June 2012 - 10:40 PM, said:

Did I say that? I dont think so... And the passive aggressive insult is uncalled for. But just in case i'm not the only illiterate person here, what I was (sarcastically) saying is that imposing artificial game mechanics (such as, for example, arbitrary damage boosters, or arbitrary statistical 'misses') to mitigate things that people do that you don't like seems a little lame. Since you're saying you don't like it because it's too simple, then don't do it! Dazzle us all with your tactical wizardry if thats what you would prefer. i personally think dancing around my opponent while trying to dodge their and other players' shots while giving back as good as I'm getting is kind of fun... As is sniping, or pop-tarting or (gasp) crippling your opponent when you have an opportunity. Point is, why take something out of someone's tactical toolkit?

I didn't realize that was your problem. It's not quite arbitrary when they have basis in physics. A round is going to lose energy over time/distance. A beam of a laser is going to lose focus over time as well.

Why would I need to use tactics when I can just out-circle strafe someone? If someone happens to be very good at circle strafing, it's easy for them to dominate by just forcing everyone else into close combat. Competitive mech warrior has always been a battle of technical skills. Most matches end up being everyone fighting in a concentrated area.

To say adding ballistic damage models into the game will entirely remove close combat is like saying that nerfing radar and adding modules is going to eliminate situational awareness.

Death Jester, on 28 June 2012 - 10:43 PM, said:

@Pewpew I understand your desire for more complexity and more skilled play and better tactics. I don't understand the desire to monkey with how damage is currently done on a game we haven't even seen the completed form of yet. I know everyone is bored and I know everyone is excited to play the game but can we hold off on picking things apart until after we find out there is even a problem? And on the subject of Circle Strafing - Don't like it? Practice with your team and punish those that use is it against you. Let them circle and while they are dog fighting with you get your buddy in behind and pound away at that nice soft rear armour.

Please see original post. I'm not demanding the developers change the mechanics of a game in beta. I understand things will change. That is not to say we shouldn't be discussing things that we'd like to see in the game.

Look at it this way - if we discuss the beta in its current state or make assumptions, we'll either be proven wrong when it's released or we'll contribute something. Either nothing happens, or something good happens.
The alternative is we don't discuss the beta or speculate at all. The only possible outcome is that nothing happens.

Edited by PewPew, 28 June 2012 - 11:15 PM.