Jump to content

Fix Flamers And Jump Jets Bilaterally.


46 replies to this topic

#21 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 10 March 2015 - 07:27 PM

View PostLordred, on 10 March 2015 - 07:24 PM, said:

Ninja Edit, didnt see.

That is because the Puma is the only clan mech/veriant with a Flamer from the get-go in game currently.


Now if I were to errata my idea to simply locking Jump Jets (Hover Tech) only, would you be more admissible to the idea?

No.

The effects wouldn't be as big as locking Flamers as well as JJs, but they'd still be mostly negative. Just rework JJs to make carrying many of them more profitable somehow (maybe exponential effectiveness increase as you get more?) and make Flamers able to functionally do something other than heat up the user. Bam, problem mostly solved.

After that I'd just do a pass to make hardwired items function more powerfully than modular items (maybe 20% better or so? I dunno). The exception to this would be Omnipod jets like the Mad Cat S, Cute Fox S, and Dire Whale S because those weren't originally hardwired.

#22 Levi Porphyrogenitus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 4,763 posts
  • LocationAurora, Indiana, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way

Posted 10 March 2015 - 07:32 PM

View PostFupDup, on 10 March 2015 - 07:27 PM, said:

After that I'd just do a pass to make hardwired items function more powerfully than modular items (maybe 20% better or so? I dunno). The exception to this would be Omnipod jets like the Mad Cat S, Cute Fox S, and Dire Whale S because those weren't originally hardwired.


Add quirks to any mech with locked kit.

#23 Lordred

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,474 posts

Posted 10 March 2015 - 07:34 PM

View PostWintersdark, on 10 March 2015 - 07:21 PM, said:

This is another of those ideas that i suspect has background motivation, but to which I cannot grasp said motivation.

So... Why do this? It's generally bad to change things Just Because Reasons.


It is my personal belief that IS Battlemechs feature far to much customization. I would like to if I had control over such a thing, see heavier restrictions placed on the IS Battlemechs, a great number of changes to weapons for both IS and Clan.

(I am a IS Purist btw.)


I've often thought of combining all of my crazy ideas into one super TL:DR.

That said, I mostly just post my thoughts to bounce off the community, see how people feel about it, and then tweak and work on my LRMBPT (Lordreds Master Balancing Post Thread)

I can only hope that no matter how wacky my thoughts may be, that you guys at-least find them to be more palatable then the people who just come in to complain.

Edited by Lordred, 10 March 2015 - 07:35 PM.


#24 Part Time

    Rookie

  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 9 posts

Posted 10 March 2015 - 07:51 PM

WHAT OTHER IDEAS DO YOU HAVE LORDRED, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THEM, AS HUMAN TO HUMAN COMMUNICATION

#25 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 10 March 2015 - 07:51 PM

View PostFupDup, on 10 March 2015 - 07:13 PM, said:

Are those mechs listed above IS mechs that have to use IS ghetto tech? Oh, they're not. They don't get the benefits of Clan goodies like Clan XL, Endo, lasers, etc. Also, they're Omnimechs instead of Battlemechs. Different construction rules.

Actually, the Omnimechs in MWO are using the Customization rules.
The Battlemechs in MWO are using the "Make your own mech construction rules + arbitrary inflated hardpoints."

There's a huge difference there; the actual customization rules for the IS would be far more limiting, and if the Clans had construction rules for the Omnimechs like the IS Battlemechs currently enjoy, you could have standard engine Dire Wolves with endo/ferro, Novas with Endo/Ferro, and Summoners without jumpjets.

---

That said, I'm mixed on this one. It would literally require PGI to actually FIX jumpjets and flamers to be something that actually can be tangibly useful.


Quote

Even then, the few "perfect storm" Clan Omnis that coincidentally have optimized base chassis (i.e. Mad Cat, Doomcrow primarily) still beat the IS anyways.

Timber Wolf has exploitable hitboxes and a higher than attainable engine rating compared to the IS. Stormcrow just has really tiny hitboxes that are also exploitable (and if you just shoot the thing on its legs, your victims will cry about how underpowered it is; trust me, try it. It's hilarious!) Actually the leg thing works on Timber Wolves too, by blasting one leg you can effectively remove both legs at the same time (twin LBX 10 + twin SRM-6).

Quote

Beyond that, some mech variants would just outright get slaughtered by this. Firestarters in particular, with around 4 hardwired Flamers on most variants, would just put the Jenner back as the best light. Every IS mech with JJs in general would lose a chunk of their payload for not all that much gain.


You mean firestarters would actually be Firestarters -- getting PGI to either fix flamers for heat/damage capability (I'd prefer the Hotshot Flamer variant if possible; a burst fire projectile of napalm that after hitting the target will catch it on fire for a short period of time, raising its heat.

For an idea of what I feel this effect should do, you can test it right now in MWO.

Load up River City and on the building that has a rooftop on fire overlooking the Citadel / Embassy (the huge building)... simply stand on that fire and watch your heat go up by approximately 20%. Say 2 flamers do something like that when you hit them (easily cooled off by the time you can fire them again).



Even if each shot only deals lump sums of 3 heat per second for 3 seconds, (with 4 seconds 'recharge' between each shot) 4 flamers would bring you up 36 heat in 3 seconds and you'd have a fourth second before they could shoot you again with flamers.

That would be super useful (even if you bring half that heat to yourself in a spike, and even if the flamers deal zero damage as a result of balancing it this way). (The Flamer Stalker, an already terrifying mech, could really ruin your day after this).

Far as jumpjets? They would have to actually jump if they are mandatory.

I personally prefer a relatively fast and immediate take off (consuming half your fuel) with the rest on reserve for controlling your landing or helping you maintain/increase your altitude until depleted. This would eliminate the spam spacebar exploit that allows people to make the Firestarter semi-invincible to weapons fire.

-------

Different topic that came up.

View PostWhatzituyah, on 10 March 2015 - 07:12 PM, said:

I heard someone say there is a upgrade for clans in Battletech that allows to remove a fixed weapon on the mech but I don't know what it would be looking through sarna.


View PostFupDup, on 10 March 2015 - 07:13 PM, said:

You'd need a refit kit and you'd end up losing the Omnipod powers in exchange. It would turn your Omni into a Battlemech.


Correct.

View PostKoniving, on 05 March 2015 - 04:55 PM, said:

(I was thinking of the day I shoved a std in there).
Posted Image

After capturing one in a campaign, I had a number of issues. The engine broke down, a number of the weapons were destroyed, some actuators had to be replaced. I went through and replaced things with what I could get and it lost its omni status. So my Dire Wolf has been rockin' a standard ever since.


Quote

If only if turning Omnimechs into Battlemechs was a thing in MWO.


View PostKoniving, on 06 March 2015 - 04:30 AM, said:

Truth be told, you wouldn't want what was required to do it.

Several missions of use with broken parts that couldn't possibly be replaced with their appropriate goodness.
Going into a battle with a damaged engine producing an extra 0.5 heat per second (in lump sums of 5 every turn), knowing it'd stop functioning entirely if I lost the right side torso.

Losing the built-in CASE on every section I had to replace armor on.

Every maintenance cycle its performance would get worse and worse due to the technician -- despite being god-mode Star Trek Scotty the miracle worker good -- having to figure out how it works as he goes along.

Not being able to replace weapons as easily as the Clans could, because IS weapons are incompatible. So each one attached has performance issues [not reflected in the meklab] (extra heat, inaccurate, extra propensity to perma-jam, range-specific targeting [so accuracy penalties before and beyond certain ranges]).

After taking a through armor crit from a PPC, the engine started generating 10 heat per turn and I melted a huge chunk of heatsinks trying to keep the mech safe, sacrificing a few functioning mechs and losing two good pilots to keep that Dire Wolf from getting destroyed.

Months where it had to be left in a facility couldn't be used to replace the engine -- which was the expected time. The actual time was 13 months in total and even then the engine has poor acceleration, so every time I remain stationary for a turn, the next turn my 3 hex 'cruising speed' counts as 'running' with all the accuracy reductions associated with it.

It's a mechanical nightmare.

Edited by Koniving, 10 March 2015 - 07:59 PM.


#26 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 10 March 2015 - 08:03 PM

View PostKoniving, on 10 March 2015 - 07:51 PM, said:

Actually, the Omnimechs in MWO are using the Customization rules.
The Battlemechs in MWO are using the "Make your own mech construction rules + arbitrary inflated hardpoints."

There's a huge difference there; the actual customization rules for the IS would be far more limiting, and if the Clans had construction rules for the Omnimechs like the IS Battlemechs currently enjoy, you could have standard engine Dire Wolves with endo/ferro, Novas with Endo/Ferro, and Summoners without jumpjets.

Hardpoints are something that only existed in the video games since MW4, they're not an actual canon concept. There isn't really much of a point in comparing those to TT.

The inflation is mostly done to differentiate variants (because many either come with the same guns or some are outright superior in all aspects) and balancing (i.e. a Shadow Hawk 2K with just 1 energy and 1 missile would be horribad).



Customizing IS Battlemechs has to be the way it is to counterbalance many of the Clans' advantages (or at least try to). That, and having to get refit kits every time you want to tweak any little thing would just not be fun at all, and many mechs are just stuck with very suboptimal stock items (i.e. having FF instead of Endo, etc.). The Clans have some of that too, but they at least have nice tech to counteract it a bit.

Yeah, Clan regular Battlemechs would be pretty crazy in MWO for the most part, which is because most of the Clan tech is so crazy by itself. The Omnimech restrictions are one of the main things keeping the Clan gear reeled in.


View PostKoniving, on 10 March 2015 - 07:51 PM, said:

You mean firestarters would actually be Firestarters
---

The only fires getting started would be their own reactors, from getting cored out by the resurgent Jenner overlords. :P

Edited by FupDup, 10 March 2015 - 08:07 PM.


#27 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 10 March 2015 - 10:28 PM

View PostFupDup, on 10 March 2015 - 08:03 PM, said:

The only fires getting started would be their own reactors, from getting cored out by the resurgent Jenner overlords. :P


I will embrace re-embrace the "well rounded one".

Edited by Deathlike, 10 March 2015 - 10:29 PM.


#28 Chuck Jager

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,031 posts

Posted 10 March 2015 - 11:52 PM

Cool - so for 1 fixed flamer my IS mechs get clan Xl, 2 slot double heatsinks, etc, etc. Both sides have pros and cons. So pick your poison. Note both sides have some less than desirable mechs (I could care less about lore so I am not motivated to play crap)

#29 Widowmaker1981

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Widow Maker
  • The Widow Maker
  • 5,032 posts
  • LocationAt the other end of the pretty lights.

Posted 11 March 2015 - 03:43 AM

View PostLordred, on 10 March 2015 - 07:06 PM, said:


Hi FupDup.


Pumas, Koshies, Blackhawks, Thors, MAD-CAT(S)s are not 'killed' off. I even saw plenty of Daishi owners jump at getting the -S so they could use their hoverjets.




I realize exactly what it would do, I do not however think it would be as dramatic as people would make out.


Anyways It is just another one of my ideas. As always, you are free to like, or dislike.

Thanks.


While i haven't looked into most of them, one thing i can most definitely say is it would 100% kill the TDR chassis (5SS/9S), if you forced the only really good hardpoints they have to be filled with useless crap.

And flamers NEED to STAY useless. Crowd control stunlock/shutdown weapons have no place in any good FPS game, its a terrible mechanic. Its ok in MMOs because usually there is some kind of cleric class that can counter it. I really, really, really do not want teams trollstarters running around shutting people down for the lols

#30 Finkledbody

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 53 posts

Posted 11 March 2015 - 04:11 AM

View PostLordred, on 10 March 2015 - 07:06 PM, said:


Hi FupDup.


Pumas, Koshies, Blackhawks, Thors, MAD-CAT(S)s are not 'killed' off. I even saw plenty of Daishi owners jump at getting the -S so they could use their hoverjets.




I realize exactly what it would do, I do not however think it would be as dramatic as people would make out.


Anyways It is just another one of my ideas. As always, you are free to like, or dislike.

Thanks.


+1 dislike

#31 RedDevil

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Slayer
  • The Slayer
  • 702 posts

Posted 11 March 2015 - 07:39 AM

No need to hard wire flamers, but the whole mount a single JJ and asymmetrical JJ mounting deal makes me cringe.

#32 ThirtyOughtSix

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 318 posts

Posted 11 March 2015 - 07:44 AM

Agree with the fixing. Disagree with the fixed.

First and foremost - fix jump jets, fix flamed heat, reduce ECM to the mech that it is on.

#33 Tuefel Hunden

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 180 posts

Posted 11 March 2015 - 07:45 AM

We want lore based stuff...unless it means my mech isn't more uber then your mech. LOL!!!!

#34 Lordred

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,474 posts

Posted 11 March 2015 - 08:55 AM

View PostFinkledbody, on 11 March 2015 - 04:11 AM, said:


+1 dislike


Thank you for your opinion.

#35 MikeBend

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 536 posts
  • LocationUnderhive

Posted 11 March 2015 - 09:12 AM

OP, did you die a lot to Firestarters lately? :D

#36 Voivode

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hungry
  • The Hungry
  • 1,465 posts

Posted 11 March 2015 - 09:20 AM

FLAMER FIX: Give flamers a chance to cause ammo to explode when it deals damage to an unarmored section that contains ammo.

JJ FIX: Let JJs be as good, or better, than they were during jump sniper rodeo time, but alter the recharge rate so it takes 4x as long to fully recharge your JJ juice.

#37 Almond Brown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 5,851 posts

Posted 11 March 2015 - 09:44 AM

View PostWhatzituyah, on 10 March 2015 - 07:24 PM, said:


You mean like how a JJ Direwolf cant jump over things half his size?


Smurfy's is usually pretty good keeping up, but he seems to be missing the DW variant that has JJ listed?

#38 Jetfire

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,746 posts
  • LocationMinneapolis, MN

Posted 11 March 2015 - 10:03 AM

There are a lot of possible fixes to JJ's and Flamers. Clans are honestly not significantly negatively affected by JJ and Flamers locked to chassis's compared to IS mechs.

Flamers:
Increase Heat Dealt
Decrease Heat Generation
Damage through armor past 80% heat threshold
Damage to Armor 0
Damage to internals 1 DPS with high crit chance to ammo

This would make the Flamer a conditional weapon with high utility in the proper situation. It would be a popcorn popper for ammo.

JJ's
The jumping power should increase but with large added forward thrust. Less poptart and more leap frog. Trying to poptart would yield jumping over the hill.

#39 Lordred

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 1,474 posts

Posted 11 March 2015 - 10:19 AM

View PostMikeBend, on 11 March 2015 - 09:12 AM, said:

OP, did you die a lot to Firestarters lately? :D


One might think that wouldn't they? Sadly this is not so.

#40 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 11 March 2015 - 10:49 AM

View PostLordred, on 10 March 2015 - 07:34 PM, said:


It is my personal belief that IS Battlemechs feature far to much customization. I would like to if I had control over such a thing, see heavier restrictions placed on the IS Battlemechs, a great number of changes to weapons for both IS and Clan.

(I am a IS Purist btw.)


I've often thought of combining all of my crazy ideas into one super TL:DR.

That said, I mostly just post my thoughts to bounce off the community, see how people feel about it, and then tweak and work on my LRMBPT (Lordreds Master Balancing Post Thread)

I can only hope that no matter how wacky my thoughts may be, that you guys at-least find them to be more palatable then the people who just come in to complain.


My issue with them is in most cases, in a fishbowl they're generally pretty pointless. That is, they clearly have a purpose, but that purpose isn't relevant when they're only viewed individually with no other changes, and the end result is they either leave us roughly where we currently are (wasted dev time) or probably worse off (lots of unintended consequences and required rebalancing later - poor play for some time and wasted dev time rebalancing after). Neither of those problems (necessarily) exist with the other changes you likely have in mind, but without knowing those other changes, we can't really offer useful commentary on these ideas.

The real problem, then, is twofold.

First, as you'd need a Grand Rebalancing Theory to unify these, they are by necessity too complex. PGI isn't going to make such large scale changes all at once anymore; it's just not good business with a released product, as it can go so horribly wrong.

Second, by it's nature such a Grand Rebalancing Theory would be enormous, and fall heavily into "TLDR" territory given it would by the first point above be purely a thought exercise but not actually something that could reasonably happen.

But it IS a hell of a lot better than random complaint posts and people crying how they're the only good player in the game.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users