322 replies to this topic

[Harrison Kelly]

Flash Frame, on 26 February 2015 - 02:20 PM, said:

All it takes is practice to overcome this hiccup.

The hiccup of being outgunned at any given range by a specialist sniper/brawler/LRM boat? How does practice help you overcome that? Look, I'm not talking about intelligent 75/25 splits like bringing backup lasers on a sniper. But things like bringing a single LRM rack or having 5 different weapons groups with wildly different firing characteristics and ranges is not a hiccup. It's handicapping yourself. There's a very good reason why nobody puts one of each type of laser on their Mech and calls it a good build. The taste-the-rainbow colors might be pretty, but wow is it impractical.

If you choose to do that, I respect your right to build that way. All I ask if you don't try and tell me how your way is better when by every measurable metric, it's not.

Edited by Harrison Kelly, 26 February 2015 - 02:29 PM.

[Satan n stuff]

Lily from animove, on 17 February 2015 - 07:59 AM, said:

is it? MW3 hat perfect convergence as well, yet try to trhow out high alphas. you don't. Excessve heatscale is the true issue, because you cna fire too many weapons at once.

@sarlic specialists will still require teamwork, because 2 coordinated specialists can suddenly be true killers in their niche, while they may need the other specialists, like a streakcrow to take care of their non niche weakness.

But this is very much a reason why pug matches can vary so much. if the randomness puts too many equally niched mechs into the map favouring this niche, that can end very well, or very bad, depending on the team you belong to. if every pilot would bring a variety of ranges of weapons this would equalise out, but people don't they lern to make a mech they can control very well and lern to work with its strenght and to avoid its weaknesses.

Try playing MW3 with a typical Annihilator. Those things would wreck everything, even in their underarmored stock config.

If 40 pinpoint with tabletop armor and internals isn't high then I don't know what is.

Edited by Satan n stuff, 26 February 2015 - 02:34 PM.

[Koniving]

We would probably see more varied loadouts if in addition to generic quirks, PGI had limb specific quirks for the specific weapons.

Example, the super specific quirk that means super weapon ER PPC becomes awesome...only works on the right arm of the Thunderbolt with the ER PPC quirk.
So you have 3 ER PPCs. Only those on the arm benefit. What's that, you can only get one or two on it?

There you have it.

Gonna need some backup weapons.

Stalker 5M? Doesn't it only have an ER large laser on the CT?
CT ER LL quirk!
Now only one ER LL gets good benefits.
Better back that stuff up.

Quirks were originally to encourage you to use things with less hard-points or to make up for deficiencies. Unfortunately the inexperience Russ has with the sheer effect of spamming random percentages on a spreadsheet brings us to super weapons instead of a viable game.

Faster firing super weapons that are ice cold isn't what we really need.
We need fixes that address the issues created by PGI when trying to put BT rules to the paper. Mass pinpoint FLD. It needs to be addressed directly. Not in such round about ways as enhancing the abilities of mechs to insane amounts or slopping together things like ghost heat. Specifically, convergence needs addressing.

Edited by Koniving, 26 February 2015 - 03:19 PM.

[Macksheen]

Flash Frame, on 26 February 2015 - 02:20 PM, said:

All it takes is practice to overcome this hiccup.

It's hardly a hiccup if you want your AC10, SRMs and MPLs to hit the same component, where some are body-based and some are arm-based.

So sure, some amount of practice will get you to the point where you can time your body lasers, body SRMs and arm AC10 and arm lasers to all hit the same component while you and the target are both moving and twisting. How much time do you have?

And that's hardly the point, when someone can put on less different type systems and simply perform better. That's cost/benefit.

Or are you saying the game should be built around only people who've logged 2000+ games?

Koniving, on 26 February 2015 - 02:37 PM, said:

We would probably see more varied loadouts if in addition to generic quirks, PGI had limb specific quirks for the specific weapons.

Example, the super specific quirk that means super weapon ER PPC becomes awesome...only works on the right arm of the Thunderbolt with the ER PPC quirk.
So you have 3 ER PPCs. Only those on the arm benefit. What's that, you can only get one or two on it?

There you have it.

Gonna need some backup weapons.

4N? Doesn't it only have a large laser on the CT?
CT LL quirk!
Now only one LL gets good benefits.
Better back that stuff up.

Quirks were originally to encourage you to use things with less hard-points or to make up for deficiencies. Unfortunately the inexperience Russ has with the sheer effect of spamming random percentages on a spreadsheet brings us to super weapons instead of a viable game.

Faster firing super weapons that are ice cold isn't what we really need.
We need fixes that address the issues created by PGI when trying to put BT rules to the paper. Mass pinpoint FLD. It needs to be addressed directly. Not in such round about ways as enhancing the abilities of mechs to insane amounts or slopping together things like ghost heat. Specifically, convergence needs addressing.

This would be pretty nice too, though I'd hate to get too ramrod-ed on all mechs. I still like some with general and some with specific quirks.

BTW, 4N doesn't have a CT hard point; STs and Arms. Still, you could bump the torsos and not the arms or vice versa - your example still works.

[Koniving]

Macksheen, on 26 February 2015 - 03:06 PM, said:

It's hardly a hiccup if you want your AC10, SRMs and MPLs to hit the same component, where some are body-based and some are arm-based.

So sure, some amount of practice will get you to the point where you can time your body lasers, body SRMs and arm AC10 and arm lasers to all hit the same component while you and the target are both moving and twisting. How much time do you have?

And that's hardly the point, when someone can put on less different type systems and simply perform better. That's cost/benefit.

Or are you saying the game should be built around only people who've logged 2000+ games?



This would be pretty nice too, though I'd hate to get too ramrod-ed on all mechs. I still like some with general and some with specific quirks.

BTW, 4N doesn't have a CT hard point; STs and Arms. Still, you could bump the torsos and not the arms or vice versa - your example still works.

Was thinking of one of the other Stalkers (had them all at one point).

In that case, I'd give its LL quirks to the left and right torsos (1 energy hardpoint each).
Of course keep generic quirks generic.

The 5M is what I was thinking of, which is where we'd put the ER LL quirk.

What I'd prefer is instead of super specific quirks, give more of a weapon class quirk for body parts.

For example Large Class laser weaponry quirk on the CT of the Stalker 5M. So it'd work with any large class laser, whether LL, ER LL, or LPL.

SRM-class (including Streak) missile quirk on the STs of Stalkers.
LRM-class missile quirks on the arms of Stalkers.

Though personally I'm not big on weapon quirks at all, but if we must have them I'd like it done this way.

That way when you come to the Cataphract 4X... this is what Quirks were really made for. A single missile launcher regardless of what type is barely useful in MWO.
But if that had a quirk to make it as effective as 1.5 to 2 missile hardpoints?

Same for the Grasshopper head, or the Hunchback or Vindicator cockpit lasers.

[MysticLink]

My God do people complain about everything in this game!

Edited by MysticLink, 26 February 2015 - 03:14 PM.

[Koniving]

MysticLink, on 26 February 2015 - 03:13 PM, said:

My God do people complain about everything in this game!

Why yes. Yes they certainly do.
Except about, uh...hm... huh... um...

Nope, nevermind.

[Jaeger Gonzo]

We just need stock mode. So anybody that want to play in balanced BT builds game can have, and those that want full custom will be good as well. I don`t think you can merge those worlds.

[Macksheen]

Jaeger Gonzo, on 26 February 2015 - 03:21 PM, said:

We just need stock mode. So anybody that want to play in balanced BT builds game can have, and those that want full custom will be good as well. I don`t think you can merge those worlds.

The irony here is that stock builds are rarely balanced among themselves ;-)

Anyway - quirks and such can influence some behaviors, but as long as other things are still the way they are we won't see (EVER) a real reduction in boating. We'd be more likely to see things like people alpha-ing and then running to hide / twist while they deal with the crap ... because the other issues around convergence / aim / etc. are still all there.

[Dock Steward]

Jaeger Gonzo, on 26 February 2015 - 03:21 PM, said:

We just need stock mode. So anybody that want to play in balanced BT builds game can have, and those that want full custom will be good as well. I don`t think you can merge those worlds.

I'm not against a stock mode, but the private lobby exists for a reason.

[Zerstorer Stallin]

I like the idea of limiting what weapons can be placed where. A full and open mech lab is just a bad idea.

[Artgathan]

Speaking of supportive team loadouts:

Part of the issue is that there aren't any real roles to be filled in MW:O - everything revolves around dealing damage to things, with the exception of Conquest mode (which you can still win just by destroying the enemy team). Mechs can't be repaired or rearmed in the midst of combat, so we don't have access to those as team roles. We also only engage one type of enemy (battlemechs) so there's no reason to bring weapons that aren't effective against battlemechs (for example, if we had infantry in the game people would need to bring mechs with either diverse or complementary loadouts [IE: you bring the mech-killer, I'll bring some anti-personnel defense]).

All of the roles we have in MW:O are combat centric - you can either be the fast guy with the smaller guns, or the slow guy with the bigger guns. Everyone can have the same radar range (which means the only differences for scouts are the speed at which they traverse the map, but given our small and predictable maps there's not really a need for dedicated scouts either).

Regarding more diverse loadouts, tiered quirks for diverse loadouts.

[Sarlic]

Harrison Kelly, on 26 February 2015 - 02:23 PM, said:

I know, right? To go back to my Highlander example, I can take my 3 ERLL + Gauss build out and know that I want to stay at 700+ meters from the main furball with it. I want to snipe, and the modules will allow me to pack ERLL Range + Gauss Cooldown, along with Radar Derp and Advanced Zoom. Great. I have boosts to all of my weapons, sufficient Gauss ammo to make lots of holes in enemy robots, and at my chosen range (700+), all of my weapons are effective. I also know that my exposure time is basically the beam duration of a LL (about the same as a Gauss charge), and I only have 2 weapon group to manage. Perfect.

If I go with the diversified approach that Sarlic is advocating (stock HGN in this case), I have an SRM 6, a Gauss Rifle, 2 Medium Lasers, and an LRM 20. All with low ammo counts, mind you. At 700 meters, my SRM 6 and 2 ML are useless. Within 180 meters, the LRM 20 is useless. The LRM 20 lock-on minigame is rather hard to execute while using Advanced Zoom, but ideally I'd be using the Gauss and the LRM 20 together. I need at least 3 weapons groups, all of which have different exposure times. The ML are DOT weapons. The SRM 6 is burst. The Gauss is PPFLD with a charge time. The LRM 20 requires me to watch the target and is indirect fire. It's a lot more confusing and a lot less efficient. At most, I can only have modules on 2 of my 4 weapon types, unless I want to sacrifice Advanced Zoom or Radar Derp. I can't boost all of my weapons with modules, and the presence of an SRM6 and 2 ML is not going to help me beat out a dedicated brawler. The lack of long-range firepower makes me lose to any dedicated sniper, even something as small as a Gauss + 2 ERLL Heavy (i.e. a Dragon, a Mech 2/3rds my size). A single LRM 20 doesn't faze anyone. I lack module boosts and ammo.

Why in the name of anything would I want to pilot that? I'm not interested in the argument that "a good pilot will make it work." A good pilot wouldn't handicap himself like that! (I mean, unless it's a pure stock Mech match where everyone is doing that).

And at least in many cases all the quirks still apply to the stock build. Imagine if they didn't!

1. Your Assault is obviously long range. So, where is your 'Assault- role? Exactly. None of the above, which the stock one has.
2. Why why you put a zoom module on a Assault? It's a Assault for a reason. Not a stationary wall.
3. If you cannot pilot more then 2 weapons group then you should ashame yourself for piloting a mech with more hardpoints left to be desired.
4. Low ammo? Are you joking? It's suffience for the match (TTK) and to support the team.
5. A single LRM20 is effective enough. If everyone, obviously would carry as per hardpoint load (or not) or better said: if some would bring a little bit more variation in the loadout then your LRM20 would be usefull instead of walking ''specialists'' who have no racks onboard.
6. You need to learn to manage several weapon groups. The excuse of you cant handle no more then two weapon groups is not true mechwarrior worthy. Just because you think it's inefficience it does not mean it is.
7.A good pilot can still make something use with that Stock build. Although i would have changed it slightly to group another weapon with the Gauss rifle. Which makes effectively one group to harash with.
8. Advanced Zoom, you should sacrifice this because you won't need it. Get a ML cooldown instead ad perhaps the SRMs.

Not saying you should run stock only but i only ask people to run a more variety and try to make use of the available hardpoints. Which alot of people, including you are dropping.

Before we know this will turn into another Arena shooter with specialists only. Now, that would be a eyeopener to everyone.

I am using almost exclusively generalist builds only with being one exception of a brawler. Which does not has only lasers.

Look, we need specialists as well and i get that. Optimal mix and so on. But like i said; slapping LL only in a Stalker is hardly a specialist at all. Or a wubbee Battlemaster.

This is my last reply to you, because the discussion is now about to go yes / no. We have our own opinion about it.

Thanks for your vision though. Appreciated.

Edited by Sarlic, 27 February 2015 - 03:29 AM.

[QuantumButler]

Never, mixed builds don't work in mwo.

[Remarius]

Roadbuster, on 17 February 2015 - 07:05 AM, said:

TLDR.

But I get your point and I agree that min/maxing is boring an creates an environment where you can only succeed if you are a. a better player, or b. adapt and also play said min/max loadouts and mechs.
Out of the two options, it's far easier to run the "OP" loadouts and you can't blame people for doing that.

How about some kind of quirk unlock system?
If you want that "-10% Energy Heat" quirk you got to equip a missile system. Or if you want "SRM6 Cooldown" you have to equip AMS.
You want to play Gauss boat without backup weapons? Np, but you don't get ballistic quirks then.
You get the idea.

You think forcing people to take one weapon to get a quirk with a totally different one is good or indeed logical?

Hint its an amazingly bad idea.

[Joseph Mallan]

zortesh, on 26 February 2015 - 12:53 PM, said:

You can be a generalist.

Which is to say you can be...
A crappy sniper
A crappy brawler
a crappy lrmboat(which is a weird distinction)

Problem is generalists are only good if the enemy also brought crappy builds, one of those things that only works in theory.

Pure dedicated snipers are the true generalists.. since a sniper can be good at range, and equally good at close range...

So having a AC20, Medium Lasers and SRMs Is a bad brawler?
Sniper With ERPPC and Gauss a Bad Sniper?

[The Ratfink]

I liked the ideas that floated around about reducing heat capacity but increasing cooling rate. So there would be less point of boating as you would not be able to fire them all very often. Also make single and double heat sinks effect different things so double are better at capacity and single at cooling rate. This could solve the boating and PP alpha issues. If you built for alpha your dps would be much lower, if you built for heat efficiency your dps would be higher.

Edited by The Ratfink, 27 February 2015 - 04:02 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Sarlic, on 27 February 2015 - 03:27 AM, said:

1. Your Assault is obviously long range. So, where is your 'Assault- role? Exactly. None of the above, which the stock one has.
2. Why why you put a zoom module on a Assault? It's a Assault for a reason. Not a stationary wall.
3. If you cannot pilot more then 2 weapons group then you should ashame yourself for piloting a mech with more hardpoints left to be desired.
4. Low ammo? Are you joking? It's suffience for the match (TTK) and to support the team.
5. A single LRM20 is effective enough. If everyone, obviously would carry as per hardpoint load (or not) or better said: if some would bring a little bit more variation in the loadout then your LRM20 would be usefull instead of walking ''specialists'' who have no racks onboard.
6. You need to learn to manage several weapon groups. The excuse of you cant handle no more then two weapon groups is not true mechwarrior worthy. Just because you think it's inefficience it does not mean it is.
7.A good pilot can still make something use with that Stock build. Although i would have changed it slightly to group another weapon with the Gauss rifle. Which makes effectively one group to harash with.
8. Advanced Zoom, you should sacrifice this because you won't need it. Get a ML cooldown instead ad perhaps the SRMs.

Not saying you should run stock only but i only ask people to run a more variety and try to make use of the available hardpoints. Which alot of people, including you are dropping.

Before we know this will turn into another Arena shooter with specialists only. Now, that would be a eyeopener to everyone.

I am using almost exclusively generalist builds only with being one exception of a brawler. Which does not has only lasers.

Look, we need specialists as well and i get that. Optimal mix and so on. But like i said; slapping LL only in a Stalker is hardly a specialist at all. Or a wubbee Battlemaster.

This is my last reply to you, because the discussion is now about to go yes / no. We have our own opinion about it.

Thanks for your vision though. Appreciated.

They are dropping it because that's what customization allows you to do.
Turn ineffective into effective.

And effective wins.

Edited by DV McKenna, 27 February 2015 - 08:54 AM.

[Sarlic]

DV McKenna, on 27 February 2015 - 06:31 AM, said:

They are dropping it because that's what customization allows you to do.
Turn ineffective and effective.

And effective wins.

Thus a invidual game, gg man.
Boating and dropping hardpoints =/= effective.

Which is shocking for such a small community.

Edited by Sarlic, 27 February 2015 - 08:06 AM.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Sarlic, on 27 February 2015 - 08:04 AM, said:

Thus a invidual game, gg man.
Boating and dropping hardpoints =/= effective.

Which is shocking for such a small community.

I'm not sure why you find it shocking at all.
Taking what works is prevalent in any game.

Welcome to gaming 101