61 replies to this topic

[Quxudica]

monk, on 03 April 2015 - 10:03 PM, said:

I think a resupply consumable would be an easy and effective solution. Have it be specific to one ammo type (so you can have an AC20 resupply for example, with 3 tons of ammo) for cbills or the improved MC version (might as well go with the flow...even though I think MC versions of consumables are unfair - it should just be another means of purchasing consumables)

To resupply, power down your mech next to the resupply drop. Full resupply takes 20 seconds. If you power up mid-resupply you will have gained a portion of the ammo. You can power down again to finish the resupply. This will require you to find a secure location or take the chance of getting hammered while resupplying. A fair trade off. I'd also restrict the resupply to the person who called it in.

Uhg, no more consumables. They are lazy arcadey things that detract from the game and ruin potentially interesting mechanics.

[monk]

Quxudica, on 04 April 2015 - 04:21 AM, said:

Uhg, no more consumables. They are lazy arcadey things that detract from the game and ruin potentially interesting mechanics.

Lazy, maybe, but I'm not sure how they detract from things. In a perfect world I'm sure there are lots of things we'd all prefer over what we get, but we don't live in such a world. Compromises will be made. Anyhow, I'm not sure how something being consumed makes it arcadey. Ammunition is consumed. Is that arcadey, too?

Sure, there could be other, better implementations, but unless you want to never see it, you need to come up with a design concept that is functional and requires minimal development team time. Art assets for a resupply drop would be minimal and it's likely that code implementation and testing would be as well.

Please suggest something that is low on production time that would function better and allow ammunition based weaponry to not become useless over time in contrast to lasers.

[monk]

Ovion, on 04 April 2015 - 03:55 AM, said:

Actually, you can use GXP upgrades to bring the free up to the same standard as the MC versions.

Ah, yeah, that's right. I rarely use them so I always forget about that. Good reminder.

I agree that ammo types could be handled in various ways. I'm just not sure that a universal resupply would be more useful than a type specific. I'd be curious to know how many builds carry more than 2 types of ammunition. You could feasibly carry two consumables to handle both types with most mechs. Ideally you'd be able to call in a specific ammo type with a single consumable and thereby get just what you need, but that would require more interface than is probably good. Unless we somehow get multistage menus ingame. (Press resupply consumable key > press ammo type from all carried types > drop initiates). Maybe universal would be easiest. Testing would probably show that really quickly. It's very possible we're facing a case of sixes.

[Khobai]

The whole point of ammo based weapons is that they run out of ammo. If you allow ammo based weapons to resupply in the middle of a fight youre effectively just making them the same as energy weapons (i.e. infinite ammo). Managing ammo as a resource would no longer be a thing since mechs could just take 1-2 tons of ammo and reload whenever they wanted.

I would much rather see a nerf to clan energy (CERML is crazy overpowered) and a buff to clan ultra autocannons, a buff to IS SRMs/SSRMs, and a complete overhaul/rebalancing of ECM/LRMs. I would also like to see the addition of two new missile weapons: MRMs for IS and ATMs for Clan so missile weapons get used more. However ATMs would require ammo switching be coded into the game since ATMs switch between three missile types. But PGI was supposedly looking into ammo switching for the Clan LBX autocannons anyway.




If resupplying is allowed it should be done as a capturable secondary objective in the middle of the map. Both teams should have to fight for the capability to resupply ammo. It should not be free.

Edited by Khobai, 04 April 2015 - 08:12 PM.

[Quxudica]

monk, on 04 April 2015 - 06:58 PM, said:

Lazy, maybe, but I'm not sure how they detract from things. In a perfect world I'm sure there are lots of things we'd all prefer over what we get, but we don't live in such a world. Compromises will be made. Anyhow, I'm not sure how something being consumed makes it arcadey. Ammunition is consumed. Is that arcadey, too?

Sure, there could be other, better implementations, but unless you want to never see it, you need to come up with a design concept that is functional and requires minimal development team time. Art assets for a resupply drop would be minimal and it's likely that code implementation and testing would be as well.

Please suggest something that is low on production time that would function better and allow ammunition based weaponry to not become useless over time in contrast to lasers.

It's arcadey because consumables are magic cards we pull out of our mechs asses. UAVs, Coolant, Strikes. these are all things that should be actual equipment we need to build into our mechs and sacrifice weight and criticals for. Strikes in particular should be part of the Command and Scout mech roles and limited to those mechs, with some actual depth to their usage.

[Ovion]

Khobai - done properly, then it's nothing like you're saying.
An extra 1-2 tons of ammo, for a monetary and time based investment (realistically, 60 seconds a ton), makes it a one off tactical option, especially if you need to shutdown to use it.

[monk]

Quxudica, on 04 April 2015 - 08:08 PM, said:

It's arcadey because consumables are magic cards we pull out of our mechs asses. UAVs, Coolant, Strikes. these are all things that should be actual equipment we need to build into our mechs and sacrifice weight and criticals for. Strikes in particular should be part of the Command and Scout mech roles and limited to those mechs, with some actual depth to their usage.

I guess I partially agree with you, but they do take module slots, so they aren't entirely made of magic. If we're talking about completely overhauling the game to make it ideal, I might agree with you completely...but I think we're way, way, way beyond that. Given what we have and what is possible, I still like the idea of resupply drops.

There is, however, a giant list of things the game could use so far as equipment goes that would be fun to add. I'd love to see more non-weapon options for things such as advanced reload systems, improved cooling jackets, jettison systems, power reverse system, etc. It would make mech builds so much more interesting to have valuable optional systems beyond just weaponry. Granted you'd need a reason to take one of those over another laser, but if things like heat made sense....anyhow, I digress.

[Bluttrunken]

On field ammo resupply is a bad idea and shouldn't be, even remotely, considered.

[Quxudica]

monk, on 04 April 2015 - 10:39 PM, said:

I guess I partially agree with you, but they do take module slots, so they aren't entirely made of magic. If we're talking about completely overhauling the game to make it ideal, I might agree with you completely...but I think we're way, way, way beyond that. Given what we have and what is possible, I still like the idea of resupply drops.

There is, however, a giant list of things the game could use so far as equipment goes that would be fun to add. I'd love to see more non-weapon options for things such as advanced reload systems, improved cooling jackets, jettison systems, power reverse system, etc. It would make mech builds so much more interesting to have valuable optional systems beyond just weaponry. Granted you'd need a reason to take one of those over another laser, but if things like heat made sense....anyhow, I digress.

I don't think replacing the consumable system is unrealistic pragmatically, but I do think PGI is unlikely to make such a change no matter how needed it might be.

I agree that I would love to see equipment like that. MWO really really needs to get away from this overbearing design in which damage and firepower are the only things considered during mech building. I really want to see a Heat system redesign with the goal of discouraging alpha strike centric gameplay in favor of smaller weapon groups and encouraging builds that actually use *less* weapons in general.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Ammo dependancy is the entire point of ammo based weapons, you might run out of ammo...derp....

If Ballistic and missile weapons didnt have that, then cannons and missiles would be the meta, as they create no heat, there would be no point in energy weapons.

Yeah, in CW, you run out of ammo....whats new about that? MAke your shots count, dont waste shots, focus fire with your allies....ive made 190 AC5 shots last a good 10 minutes....fired off all my ammo before I finally died...

[Ngamok]

Virgil Greyson, on 31 March 2015 - 01:09 AM, said:

Why not let mechs with ammo return to the dropship for a resupply? Of course limit it in some way with a cooldown timer or something.

Would be nice if there was a re supply option. But it would have to be something like running back to the drop ship and powering down for a short time till you got ammo back. Kind of like in Mech Commander on the repair bays. Also the resupply bays would have a short cool down on being able to get more than 1 mech stocked back up so people would have to wait say 30s or something till they can go in after the previous guy finishes.

Or have a resupply module that would drop ammo for you with a 50% tax so getting more AC/20 rounds would be 50% of your total instead of full resupply.

[MauttyKoray]

Solution: Use mixed builds.

[monk]

Mixed weapon builds and saving your ammo are not the solution. When you have things like double armor and minimal heat penalties for all laser builds, there is a flaw in the system. The two systems are simply not balanced, and this is especially clear with CW. If the point of ammo weapons is to run cooler than lasers then the difference between the two systems needs to be enough that you'd see both being used in the field. If this is not the case with CW then there is an obvious issue that needs to be addressed. Every weapon system should have a role to play, and that includes things like flamers. Work still needs to be done.just because there are a few players who have a ballistic build that works for them in CW doesn't mean the system is working fine. When large numbers of mechs are non-viable that is an issue that needs addressing.

For the record, mixed weapon builds should be more common, but the idea that you have to mix other weapons with ballistics to remain viable overt time but there is minimal drawback to the alternative means something isn't working right.

[MauttyKoray]

For the record...things have been screwed up since the 'bandage fix' of doubling armor to make TTK higher instead of fixing the other issues (like a bloated heat system). But PGI seems insistent on not listening to the community and fix the real problem, instead making more bandages and throwing the system even further out of whack.

[Jman5]

I think ammo is pretty balanced in regular group queue. However in Community warfare fights are lasting significantly longer on average. Take my hunchback 4J for example. In regular queue I bring a hefty 1800 missiles. I sometimes go through it all, but not usually. In community warfare, I bring 2340 missiles and I almost always burn through it entirely.

IMO, PGI should straight up buff CW ammo by 25-50% per ton.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

El Bandito, on 30 March 2015 - 11:18 PM, said:

Fat lot of good a couple of ML will do against the enemy in CW due to long ranged pokes. Might as well bring 2 more tons of ammo for the Gauss/AC instead, and eject once it runs out.

*sighs*

I hate this mindset... it's backwards. So very, very backwards.

If you run ammo dependant builds, you should have a backup weapon or two. When I play IS, one of my primary defense mechs is the founders catapult. 2A-LRM15's and 4mlas... plenty of ammo sure, but when my boxes get shot off, or my ammo runs dry, I can't count the number of times I've been able to fall back to a somewhat shielded defensive location, and utilize those medium lasers as the enemy marches up to head towards the gen's.

Hell I've had the single head laser on a HBK 4G save my hind end multiple times, sure having 3mlas on that mech cuts into my ammo reserves for the AC20 a bit, but at the end of the day, that centerline laser has finished off more opponents than i care to think about.

I mean sure, it's all personal preference... But these machines, are ment to have backup weaponry, Running dry on ammo should be a real concern.

It saddens me that the idea is "oh take all ammo, just eject when you're not useful anymore." That puts no value on the battlemechs... In Mechwarrior, one of the taglines is "Life is cheap, battlemech's arn't." but the way some people play... *sighs.*

I mean hey, you're gonna play how you're gonna play, but, I mean, seriously, where's the fun at that point. You're clearly missing the point of Battletech/Mechwarrior with that kind of thinking.

[Stoned Prophet]

Quxudica, on 30 March 2015 - 09:24 PM, said:

I was considering dropping as IS this week as I greatly enjoy my IS mechs. Mostly my Jaegers and Wolverine, however it seems like Ammo based mech builds are at a huge disadvantage in CW compared to energy builds. Last week I dropped as Jade Falcon using energy builds and didn't often lose my second mech, typically keeping my first medium drop alive for half or more of the fight. Using my AC/5 WVR/JM6 it seems like I'll hit a point rather quickly where I am forced to either stand around doing nothing, or eject and credit the enemy team a kill.

Am I exaggerating the effect here or are ammo builds really as bad as they seem in CW? I realize in the fluff rearming a mech is not something that can be done in the field, but I almost wonder if that really needs to be available.

I do reat with all sorts of bulds. My Ilya daka mech does great, as do my Jagers, and my Victors... It sounds to me like you just cant aim.

[El Bandito]

Flash Frame, on 05 April 2015 - 01:46 PM, said:

*sighs*

I hate this mindset... it's backwards. So very, very backwards.

If you run ammo dependant builds, you should have a backup weapon or two. When I play IS, one of my primary defense mechs is the founders catapult. 2A-LRM15's and 4mlas... plenty of ammo sure, but when my boxes get shot off, or my ammo runs dry, I can't count the number of times I've been able to fall back to a somewhat shielded defensive location, and utilize those medium lasers as the enemy marches up to head towards the gen's.

Hell I've had the single head laser on a HBK 4G save my hind end multiple times, sure having 3mlas on that mech cuts into my ammo reserves for the AC20 a bit, but at the end of the day, that centerline laser has finished off more opponents than i care to think about.

I mean sure, it's all personal preference... But these machines, are ment to have backup weaponry, Running dry on ammo should be a real concern.

It saddens me that the idea is "oh take all ammo, just eject when you're not useful anymore." That puts no value on the battlemechs... In Mechwarrior, one of the taglines is "Life is cheap, battlemech's arn't." but the way some people play... *sighs.*

I mean hey, you're gonna play how you're gonna play, but, I mean, seriously, where's the fun at that point. You're clearly missing the point of Battletech/Mechwarrior with that kind of thinking.

I play CW to win, not for fun--it is my tryhard mode. I won't touch C1 and 4G in CW with a 10 foot stick.

[Chagatay]

Quxudica, on 30 March 2015 - 09:24 PM, said:

I was considering dropping as IS this week as I greatly enjoy my IS mechs. Mostly my Jaegers and Wolverine, however it seems like Ammo based mech builds are at a huge disadvantage in CW compared to energy builds. Last week I dropped as Jade Falcon using energy builds and didn't often lose my second mech, typically keeping my first medium drop alive for half or more of the fight. Using my AC/5 WVR/JM6 it seems like I'll hit a point rather quickly where I am forced to either stand around doing nothing, or eject and credit the enemy team a kill.

Am I exaggerating the effect here or are ammo builds really as bad as they seem in CW? I realize in the fluff rearming a mech is not something that can be done in the field, but I almost wonder if that really needs to be available.

I really feel the opposite. Unlike a regular match, you only need to average 7.5m with each mech (unlike 15m). Also as others have posted you can go with no backup weapons and ammo+ as your backup weapon is your next mech (might want some though for your final mech). CW is also less Nascar-like (fights are usually gun line on gun line action) so you can lose some engine rating if you really need to pack even more ammo in.

[Jman5]

Flash Frame, on 05 April 2015 - 01:46 PM, said:

*sighs*

I hate this mindset... it's backwards. So very, very backwards.

If you run ammo dependant builds, you should have a backup weapon or two. When I play IS, one of my primary defense mechs is the founders catapult. 2A-LRM15's and 4mlas... plenty of ammo sure, but when my boxes get shot off, or my ammo runs dry, I can't count the number of times I've been able to fall back to a somewhat shielded defensive location, and utilize those medium lasers as the enemy marches up to head towards the gen's.

Hell I've had the single head laser on a HBK 4G save my hind end multiple times, sure having 3mlas on that mech cuts into my ammo reserves for the AC20 a bit, but at the end of the day, that centerline laser has finished off more opponents than i care to think about.

I mean sure, it's all personal preference... But these machines, are ment to have backup weaponry, Running dry on ammo should be a real concern.

It saddens me that the idea is "oh take all ammo, just eject when you're not useful anymore." That puts no value on the battlemechs... In Mechwarrior, one of the taglines is "Life is cheap, battlemech's arn't." but the way some people play... *sighs.*

I mean hey, you're gonna play how you're gonna play, but, I mean, seriously, where's the fun at that point. You're clearly missing the point of Battletech/Mechwarrior with that kind of thinking.

It's really not backward. It's efficient use of your mech resources in a time constricted environment. It's better to spend most of your time at 100% weapon capability than to split your time between 100% and 50% firepower. If time wasn't an issue and your allies never ran out of mechs before you, I would agree with you. However that's not how community warfare operates. You want to spend an entire wave's push/defense participating in the fight throwing everything you have the enemy. Unless you're poorly managing your mech resources and time management, ejecting out is often preferable to spending 15 minutes fighting with nothing but a head laser from your first mech.

Maybe from a Roleplaying perspective you can justify it, but from a gameplay perspective the correct move is to not be too stingy about going through your mechs. Build them to hit hard for a period of time and then toss them out at the right time. You really don't want to waste tonnage so that a mech can linger unless it's your 4th wave mech.

Backup weapons for regular queue, sure. Backup weapons for your 4th wave mech? I guess, but you really don't want ammo-dependent mechs for your last wave. Backup weapons your first 3 mechs? Don't bother.

I'm sorry if you think this is some sacrilege of Canon, but most of us don't really care if we're following a lore-approved play style.

Edited by Jman5, 05 April 2015 - 05:34 PM.