146 replies to this topic

[Uri Brauer]

Your back is your weak point. Circle strafing exposes it to the your target's teammates. There will be times when it's a really bad idea.

Edited by Uri Brauer, 28 June 2012 - 11:19 PM.

[Devayner]

Dont mess with the Circle of Death,Its those magic moments that define mechwarrior and set it apart.Remove it and you take away the mojo .

IMO
A lot of people want to balance /tweak/"fix"/nerf.I say it fells like the devs are taking the TT rules as there template seriously as they can in translation.Time has proven those rules work,in as much as we are chomping at the bit to get in there.It aint broken dont fix it.

[BenEEeees VAT GROWN BACON]

PewPew, on 28 June 2012 - 11:14 PM, said:

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.

Even if this were implemented there is no guarantee that players will suddenly innovate new tactics because of the changes. In fact, it may do the contrary and strengthen circle of death because it now has more lethal impact. Reducing the time COD lasts by increasing short-range DPS might just leave you with shorter CODs.

Weapon effectiveness are already range-dependent as it is; LRMs will not arm at close range and thus do no damage, AC/20s have shorter range over other models and lasers output damage overtime in a stream (thus easier to focus more damage at closer range than further).

If AC/10s and 20s get a 15% damage boost <100m, how would that better encourage new tactics aside from the obvious "arm Mech with biggest engine and AC/20 then charge straight into an enemy?" In fact, with such a mechanic, the AC would overlap the role of an LBX.

As it stands with role warfare and information warfare, plenty of new potential strategies can arise to solve old and new problems. As iterated before by myself and many other members, this will take time to develop. The gameplay videos released by PGI isn't about showing off tactics, they are merely there to introduce the different weight classes of mechs, and to show a map. The leaked beta videos are made by players still freshly figuring out the game, and most of these occur in random pub servers where it's hard to co-ordinate strategies. Look at how differently DOTA/Team Fortress 2/StarCraft 2 is played in a public server compared to a competitive one!

Your complaints as they are, are based on speculation and your solution has little logical merit behind them. I've read every single one of your post here and you do not explain why including variable damage would lead to new tactics - it follows faithfully the <2. Add variable damage 3. ???, 4. PROFIT> leap of logic. You merely tell people that they've misread your original post or that they are illiterate, but I think the community understands more than you do.

Until you refine your ideas, bashing your critics over the head by practically saying "MY IDEAS WILL DO THIS! BELIEVE ME!" will not get you anywhere. You need to demonstrate how adding variable damage will equate to more tactical innovation for this kind of game, and not lead to more prominent use of pop tarting or merely shorter Circle of Death engagements instead.

Edited by BenEEeees VAT GROWN BACON, 29 June 2012 - 12:40 AM.

[HANGMAN1962]

well this will kill off the lite med mech players and turn it into another mw4 all assualt ez win gruop fire issue!
no thanks m8.
not interested in another who has the biggest and mostest style game sir!

[-Mobius-]

If you don't want to circle strafe, you could sit in an Atlas and try and take it... personally, I hope your on the other team, beacuse i will have fun running circles around you and tagging you back armor Besides... missiles hurt.

[Toldor]

MobiousOne, on 29 June 2012 - 01:12 AM, said:

If you don't want to circle strafe, you could sit in an Atlas and try and take it... personally, I hope your on the other team, beacuse i will have fun running circles around you and tagging you back armor Besides... missiles hurt.

With the right tactics your Atlas is covered by an Archer or Catapult which takes down that stupid fly running around it

[-Mobius-]

Toldor, on 29 June 2012 - 01:20 AM, said:

With the right tactics your Atlas is covered by an Archer or Catapult which takes down that stupid fly running around it

LOL, too true... but I was making a point

[Kelinium]

Toldor, on 29 June 2012 - 01:20 AM, said:

With the right tactics your Atlas is covered by an Archer or Catapult which takes down that stupid fly running around it

Thus we get to the heart of the circle strafing matter. It is a perfectly valid and great tactic, when used in certain situations, however any lance worth their salt will do their utmost to cover each other's backs. I know I for one will take a few seconds out of my own fight to take a few pot shots at a lighter mech if they are harassing a lance-mate by circling around like a vulture, no reference to the mech intended , and nibbling at their ankles.

I guess to put it simply your lancemates should be able to watch your back and help you out if you're stuck in that kind of situation. I may have missed some things here but I just woke up lol.

As far as increasing weapon damage at close range. Realistically the projectile-based weapons should already do more damage at close range than at say their maximum ranges. Energy weapons however are a different matter. Yes they would realistically lose focus/beam-cohesion after a certain distance however this is also why they, like the projectile-based weapons, are assigned maximum ranges.

For energy weapons their maximum range would be the distance the beam can travel and still do it's proper amount of damage without losing cohesion. Of course I am mostly referring to the laser weapons. Not sure entirely how the PPC's work, could work the same as the lasers or entirely different. Then again I could just be talking out my rear right now about all of this so if I am wrong in any of this please feel free to say so. Not like anyone here needs express permission to do so anyway from what I've seen so far.

Edited by solemcleavu, 29 June 2012 - 02:08 AM.

[ArchSight]

Circle Strafing has been in Mech Warrior for a very long time. So much time, game play mechanics may or may not be built on it. This tactic goes well with the way our hit boxes are put on our mechs and the limited turning speeds of the past. You would all see that hinted in my guide if you ever read it. In fact I want everyone too read it, post your thoughts(Bump), and recommend gamers to read it to give them an idea how Mech Warrior games play right now. I'm also open to changing a lot of it's material so if your willing to help I would greatly appreciate it and I think the Mech Warrior Community would too. I'll change it into the community mech warrior guide if you do. The link is in my signature.

Edited by ArchSight, 29 June 2012 - 02:14 AM.

[Urulf]

Appart of circle-strafe, there is one more option: Pop-tard!
Hide behind a rock and pop enough of your mech to shoot crap and hide before you are seen. Yeah great option.

Just leave the lovely circle of death as it is.

my 2 cents.

[-Mobius-]

solemcleavu, on 29 June 2012 - 02:04 AM, said:

Thus we get to the heart of the circle strafing matter. It is a perfectly valid and great tactic, when used in certain situations, however any lance worth their salt will do their utmost to cover each other's backs. I know I for one will take a few seconds out of my own fight to take a few pot shots at a lighter mech if they are harassing a lance-mate by circling around like a vulture, no reference to the mech intended , and nibbling at their ankles.

I guess to put it simply your lancemates should be able to watch your back and help you out if you're stuck in that kind of situation. I may have missed some things here but I just woke up lol.

LOL... I was just making a point.. really... lol The game is obviously not one-on-one *sigh*

[Terror Teddy]

No alternative strategies to cirdle of death? There are LOTS of them but it also depends on if there is a coehrent plan within the team that is fighting and an actual commander giving orders.

Assaults takes the lead, ties up the major players in short range fighting. Long range mechs armed with PPCs, Gauss guns and LRM's will snipe from a distance.

Light mechs stay out of heavier mechs way and takes pot shots on them with missiles and other long range weapons or sneaks in with a pot shot and darts out again.

Most of the time the 'circle of death' is a large part of computer gaming mechwarrior mainly because there was a lack of viable terrain to use - hopefully we will have a lot more terrain that we can use to our advantage.

Each player learns to find their role depending on their fitting - if you get caught with a long range mech against a close range mech well, that is war for you.

Edited by Terror Teddy, 29 June 2012 - 02:56 AM.

[Remarius]

PewPew, on 28 June 2012 - 07:06 PM, said:

I think there needs to be complexity or depth in order for a solid metagame to develop. In past MW titles, the metagame has always been incredibly simple.

People play certain ways because that's what wins. In the current state, the biggest factor in who wins is who can put out the most damage as fast as they can. This will not change unless doing something different can provide a significant benefit. And in order to create significant benefit or incentive to do otherwise, there needs to be consequences for NOT playing strategically. This means if you make a misstep and get caught, you should be punished for that. If you accidentally stumble into a group of enemies, you should be punished for that.



I'm not talking about increasing damages for short-range weapons at a flat rate. I'm saying increase the damage of certain weapons at close ranges. Damage will be a function of range.

This is kind of frustrating when people read &quot;eliminate circle strafing&quot; and then dismiss the entire concept without reading what it actually is.

This really doen't make sense if you've watched any of the footage or talked to beta players. If you "accidentally stumble into a group of enemies" you WILL be savaged currently and jenners etc are very dangerous when coordinating with another mech as its very easy to get behind an atlas as your speed and turning circle is much better. Good luck solo in an atlas trying to circle of death anyone except another atlas.... and tahst why you have four weight classes not one.

[Toldor]

solemcleavu, on 29 June 2012 - 02:04 AM, said:

As far as increasing weapon damage at close range. Realistically the projectile-based weapons should already do more damage at close range than at say their maximum ranges. Energy weapons however are a different matter. Yes they would realistically lose focus/beam-cohesion after a certain distance however this is also why they, like the projectile-based weapons, are assigned maximum ranges.

The only projectile-based weapon which makes more damage on closer targets is the Gauss Rifle. Waiting for this one :-) Must look nice when the big ball hits a mech :-)

[Sean von Steinike]

Keep it completely viable. Rely on your lance mates to guard your back from the pesky circler. The mech running a circle is going to have to expose its own back to its enemy's teammate. It's supposed to be a team game right?

[John Dragon]

if you watched the frozen city map walkthrough on facebook you can also see that in alot of areas their won't be room to circle strafe which will encourage new stratagies

[RedDragon]

I don't see the problem with circle-strafing. It's the logical way to do close combat in mechs. Every weapon has one strategy it's good at. Most dogfights in WW1+2 looked the same, knights on horses also wouldn't ride into melee and bash at each other with their lances. Even in tabletop BT you would use circle-strafing if there wouldn't be any form of cover that gave you a better hit modifier.
And I don't really see circling become a huge problem in MWO since the maps are totally different from what you had in MW2-4. In those games maps were mostly large open areas. in MWO you'll get lots of hills, buildings etc. to make circling less viable.
Also circling only really makes sense in a one on one combat. If there are more mechs involved, you will get shot at from all sides and at the same time spoil the aim of your allies. If both teams have any resemblance of tactics, there won't be much strafing at all.
Last but not least circle-strafing at least takes a lot of skill to be performed the right way. You have to coordinate movement with firing you weapons, you have to keep an eye out on your surroundings and your path and you have to rotate your torso to not always present one side to your enemy. I'll gladly take this over sniping and hill-humping any time.

[Whip]

Remove the circle of death, you may as well as remove every mech out there, and everyone is only allowed to have one mech (Assault Class)

Circle strafing is the number one way for mediums and lights to be able to make a go off it in combat against heavier opponents.

For starters, to close with the intended target without getting blown away, the pilot will already be using terrain and cover. Then they will try to work to the flank / rear of the intended target before engaging it.

This means a pilot has to master both his mech, have good situational awareness, ability to read the ground and the ebb and flow of battle and that is before he even takes his first shot.

Removing the “circle of death” will promote one thing and one thing only, "Camping".

I for one did not join the boy scouts. I prefer mech cockpits to camp chairs, and my mech does not come with a "foldaway tent.”

To the OP, all I see this thread is a post about you telling everyone that you are too much of a crap pilot to be able to manoeuvre a mech around a map and that you like to camp.

I suggest you go back to your boy scout troop and tell them you have failed your outdoor navigation test and hand back your eagle scout badge!!

Edited by Whip, 29 June 2012 - 03:58 AM.

[Kumakichi]

I'm fine with circle strafing. It sounds plan and simple when you just say circle strafing and picture mechs out in a flat open area running in circles. But most maps have terrain, buildings, boulders, etc... to contend with so some people are better at it than others. Besides its the normal reaction when 2 mechs meet. Much like dogfights only its 2 dimensional for mechs.

What I really wouldn't want to see is an Atlas ducking and sidestepping across the battlefield. Something that large couldn't be that nimble. If you made it that way it would totally wreck the feeling of piloting a large mech.

[Strum Wealh]

If one really wanted to justify making circle-strafing less effective and/or generally more difficult (though, that raises the question of who would want to do that, and why... ), one could refer to BT canon (specifically, pages 99 and 104-105 of Total Warfare), which dictates that "A ’Mech can twist its torso one hexside (60 degrees) to the left or right of the direction in which its feet are pointing."

That is, in general 'Mechs were limited to twisting up to 60 degrees to either side, covering a 120 degree arc in the direction of the legs' facing.
Arm swinging would allow for the coverage of an additional arc, allowing the 'Mech to deal with targets to the sides and rear.

If such a limit were implemented, it would mean that the majority of a BattleMech's armament could bot be brought to bear against a target more than ~60 degrees to either side of the facing of said BattleMech's legs. As such, 'Mechs would then need to be facing in the general direction of their targets in order to use all of their available firepower.
As such, there would be a chance that circle-strafing would become a less powerful tactic, and that flanking maneuvers and ambushes from the sides could become much more viable - and desirable - options.

Your thoughts?