231 replies to this topic

[Xetelian]

Just put a tiny limit on how often you can alpha strike in a 3 second period.

[Hotthedd]

Alpha strikes with PPFLD PLUS being able to destroy/disable a mech due to component hitboxes is the problem.

[Escef]

Xetelian, on 04 April 2015 - 09:02 AM, said:

Just put a tiny limit on how often you can alpha strike in a 3 second period.

There already is, many weapons have cooldowns of 4 seconds or more.

[xImmortalx]

Burktross, on 04 April 2015 - 08:50 AM, said:

Well, that's the brash way of putting it, but yes.
Immortal, I'm legitimately curious. Have you ever tried TT?

And there it is. The inevitable "are you sure you know what you're talking about?"

Yes I do. I've done TT. I've also read the books, watched the cartoon and played every MW from 2 onward, and online competitively from 3 onward. The point I've been trying to make to all the TT fundamentalists is that all this "salvation lies with strict adherence to TT" nonsense has been tried before. And it always went one of two ways: terrible balance and 'gunbag' mechs, or a game so convoluted and with so many features designed to frustrate players in the name of keeping things balanced and 'TT-like' that only the most hardcore of players even bothered with it. MWO seems to be leaning the latter way and it frustrates me to no end that we never seem to learn our lessons.

The only thing keeping this game alive ATM is the willingness of people who are still on the fence to throw money out the window in the faint hope that this game will eventually get its act together. What do you think will happen when those people finally decide to throw in the towel? Do you think hardcore fans have the money and willingness to keep this game alive indefinitely? Do you think other gamers will even give a game with so many glaring faults and such convoluted mechanics a second look when there are lots of polished, well balanced games out there?

[MrZakalwe]

Otto Cannon, on 04 April 2015 - 06:45 AM, said:

Lore alphas were not pinpoint.

Heat is being used as a bandaid on the gaping wound of pinpoint alpha damage. The solution would be a slight spreading of shots when weapons are fired together, which has been suggested many times. We can't have that though, because PGI say it isn't technically possible and would make hit detection even worse than it already is. Plus of course the people who would cry 'but muh skill' and use the false RNG strawman argument if the game was made more challenging by removing deathstar pinpoint.

So we're stuck with a ridiculous ghostheat system until PGI add something better, and they're unlikely to bother unless it makes more money than it costs.

Another thread complaining about the ability to aim. These never get boring

Your solution would just reward the use of small numbers of larger weapons rather than arrays of smaller weapons also at least partially remove the capacity to aim accurately meaning more of the game would be decided by luck.

That adding a luck mechanic to the game would increase the influence of luck and decrease the influence of skill is not so much a strawman as an inevitable result.

Unless you can find a way to add a luck mechanic without any luck being involved?

[Burktross]

xImmortalx, on 04 April 2015 - 09:37 AM, said:

And there it is. The inevitable "are you sure you know what you're talking about?"

Yes I do. I've done TT. I've also read the books, watched the cartoon and played every MW from 2 onward, and online competitively from 3 onward. The point I've been trying to make to all the TT fundamentalists is that all this "salvation lies with strict adherence to TT" nonsense has been tried before. And it always went one of two ways: terrible balance and 'gunbag' mechs, or a game so convoluted and with so many features designed to frustrate players in the name of keeping things balanced and 'TT-like' that only the most hardcore of players even bothered with it. MWO seems to be leaning the latter way and it frustrates me to no end that we never seem to learn our lessons.

The only thing keeping this game alive ATM is the willingness of people who are still on the fence to throw money out the window in the faint hope that this game will eventually get its act together. What do you think will happen when those people finally decide to throw in the towel? Do you think hardcore fans have the money and willingness to keep this game alive indefinitely? Do you think other gamers will even give a game with so many glaring faults and such convoluted mechanics a second look when there are lots of polished, well balanced games out there?

What convoluted mechanics are so dire of a threat and so impossible to learn? MWO certainly isn't pick up and go, but it's not quantum physics, either.

[Almond Brown]

Only 2 real things to try, so a complete MWO 2.0 rebuild is not required, as that will not/never happen.

1) Reduce the amount of added Heat Cap any Single/DHS heat sink provides.

2) Increase the CD's of all weapons that currently generate less than (maths based on some level of Heat/Damage calculation and not combined #'s as it is now re: GH). The game can indeed be "Hot" as is but that Heat is seemingly always accompanied by a HUGE (40+ point Alpha Strike) and very repeatable.

Hell even a setting that applies to firing any 3 weapons at once, incurs a 6-9s CD on ALL mounted weapons.

Edited by Almond Brown, 04 April 2015 - 10:01 AM.

[Weeny Machine]

MrZakalwe, on 04 April 2015 - 09:48 AM, said:

Another thread complaining about the ability to aim. These never get boring

*sigh* No one says you shouldn't aim. However, you shouldn't have INSTANTLY a perfect allignment of your weapons. And if you find that too "unrealistic"...try to make pin point shots in rl

[Hotthedd]

MrZakalwe, on 04 April 2015 - 09:48 AM, said:

Another thread complaining about the ability to aim. These never get boring

Your solution would just reward the use of small numbers of larger weapons rather than arrays of smaller weapons also at least partially remove the capacity to aim accurately meaning more of the game would be decided by luck.

That adding a luck mechanic to the game would increase the influence of luck and decrease the influence of skill is not so much a strawman as an inevitable result.

Unless you can find a way to add a luck mechanic without any luck being involved?

Actually, you have to have BETTER aim in order to hit the same section with chainfire.

Any fool can alpha when all the weapons converge perfectly.

[xImmortalx]

Burktross, on 04 April 2015 - 09:54 AM, said:

What convoluted mechanics are so dire of a threat and so impossible to learn? MWO certainly isn't pick up and go, but it's not quantum physics, either.

Well I'm certainly glad I'm discussing this with someone who's taking my points seriously and who's trying to look at the problem from all points of view, not just his own!

Seriously though, have you actually ever tried getting a friend who's not into CBT/MW to play this game? Have you seen how utterly clueless most new players are? Most other games out there are easy to get into but make this one look like a puddle when it comes to depth. MWO does the opposite. You have to scour (inexistent) tomes of knowledge to understand all the mechanics, and once you do it's nothing but poke warfare and NASCAR.

[Mystere]

MrZakalwe, on 04 April 2015 - 09:48 AM, said:

Another thread complaining about the ability to aim. These never get boring

Your solution would just reward the use of small numbers of larger weapons rather than arrays of smaller weapons also at least partially remove the capacity to aim accurately meaning more of the game would be decided by luck.

That adding a luck mechanic to the game would increase the influence of luck and decrease the influence of skill is not so much a strawman as an inevitable result.

Unless you can find a way to add a luck mechanic without any luck being involved?

As someone has already stated:

Convergence!

Replace instant and automatic convergence with fixed convergence instead, but adjustable in the Mech Lab and on the battlefield. Get to the convergence sweet spot before firing or aim your weapons individually.

Now that takes skill. Or do you disagree?

Edited by Mystere, 04 April 2015 - 10:31 AM.

[Burktross]

xImmortalx, on 04 April 2015 - 10:22 AM, said:

Well I'm certainly glad I'm discussing this with someone who's taking my points seriously and who's trying to look at the problem from all points of view, not just his own!

Seriously though, have you actually ever tried getting a friend who's not into CBT/MW to play this game? Have you seen how utterly clueless most new players are? Most other games out there are easy to get into but make this one look like a puddle when it comes to depth. MWO does the opposite. You have to scour (inexistent) tomes of knowledge to understand all the mechanics, and once you do it's nothing but poke warfare and NASCAR.

I suppose you're right, although, new players I introduce aren't turned of by the mechanics, rather the grind. As it is now, MWO either devolves into something completely different to cater to newer players, thus metaphorically dying in the process, or it remains undocumented and (relatively) convoluted and dries up slowly.

[Hotthedd]

Mystere, on 04 April 2015 - 10:25 AM, said:

As someone has already stated:

Convergence!

Replace instant and automatic convergence with fixed convergence instead, but adjustable in the Mech Lab and on the battlefield. Get to the convergence sweet spot before firing or aim your weapons individually.

Now that takes skill. Or do you disagree?

+ 1000

[xImmortalx]

Burktross, on 04 April 2015 - 10:31 AM, said:

I suppose you're right, although, new players I introduce aren't turned of by the mechanics, rather the grind. As it is now, MWO either devolves into something completely different to cater to newer players, thus metaphorically dying in the process, or it remains undocumented and (relatively) convoluted and dries up slowly.

Don't even get me started on how utterly stupid the grind is.

But I disagree on MWO needing to 'devolve' in order to cater to newer players. Changing weapon values as well as mech hardpoints isn't a 'devolution', it's an adjustment made to account for this game no longer being about dice rolls but being about real people aiming weapons at each other. And it does away with stupid mechanics like ghost heat, gauss charge and the like.

MW4's Mektek-improved hardpoint system was perfectly suited to a game where weapon values were adjusted for balance all the time, didn't require made-up mechanics to limit boating and made most/all stock configs viable on a single chassis without breaking it altogether. Considering the fact that a lot of these asspull mechanics came as a result of mechs being able to carry weapons common sense dictates they should not have been able to carry, a problem prevalent in games before MW4 as well, why was this never brought up as a solution?

No, the real devolution was when the powers that be said "let's forget MW2, 3 and 4 ever happened, ignore all lessons learned from them and try to make a MW game as if we were the first ones to ever do it."

[Barantor]

xImmortalx, on 04 April 2015 - 10:22 AM, said:

Well I'm certainly glad I'm discussing this with someone who's taking my points seriously and who's trying to look at the problem from all points of view, not just his own!

Seriously though, have you actually ever tried getting a friend who's not into CBT/MW to play this game? Have you seen how utterly clueless most new players are? Most other games out there are easy to get into but make this one look like a puddle when it comes to depth. MWO does the opposite. You have to scour (inexistent) tomes of knowledge to understand all the mechanics, and once you do it's nothing but poke warfare and NASCAR.

The problem with that though is the new player experience in this game is nonexistent.

I'm fine with going back to MW4 and putting in size restrictions on weapon hardpoints.

I always felt the game was more tactical when you had to manage different ranges and weapon types... but I guess I'm in the minority if you look at the meta.

[Mcgral18]

Convergence itself isn't the issue...magical instantaneous perfectly pinpoint convergence is.


If it took at least a second to get magical convergence, at least it would require some thought...of course, we can't have progressive convergence. Even with 16 mechs it was taxing, let alone with 24. Not reliable either.


PGI isn't about to rewrite code either. MWO will always be a simple shooter, if you want a more in depth BattelTech experience, it will need to come from a different game.

[Barantor]

Mcgral18, on 04 April 2015 - 11:23 AM, said:

PGI isn't about to rewrite code either. MWO will always be a simple shooter, if you want a more in depth BattelTech experience, it will need to come from a different game.

Pretty much why I've uninstalled. I want more of a simulator and this just isn't it.

Maybe MW5 will be a thing one day.

[Madcap72]

Bush Hopper, on 04 April 2015 - 10:04 AM, said:

*sigh* No one says you shouldn't aim. However, you shouldn't have INSTANTLY a perfect allignment of your weapons. And if you find that too "unrealistic"...try to make pin point shots in rl

Actually, the targeting computer and boresight collmination would dictate that unless everything was broken in a mech, that yea, you SHOULD have instant perfect alighnment of your weapons.

It's not COD, or Fallout. mechs arn't some dude with with a huge cone of fire.

Note that with ballistic weapons, there isn't even auto calculated hold over on the projectiles based on feedback from the rangefinder.


If all the weapons are boresighted, then direct line of sight energy weapons by nature, should have instant perfect alignment.

[Telmasa]

Main reason I like this post is that it doesn't make sense to me, at all, that mechs can run around with 6-8 MPL and get no heat problems firing full alphas nonstop...yet I take more than couple PPCs, large lasers, or large ballistic/missile weapons, and can instantly cook myself.

I like the OP's concept alot better than what we have in game right now.


edit: I really think "convergence" is a dead end. That's too far into simulation-frustration territory, it doesn't sound fun to me to have to spend even MORE time in the mechlab adjusting convergence artificially. Where I aim is where things should hit; it's enough of a challenge keeping a steady aim with torso vs. legs interaction, and then you have PGI's *wonderful* terrain design . . . .

Edited by Telmasa, 04 April 2015 - 12:03 PM.

[xImmortalx]

Barantor, on 04 April 2015 - 11:12 AM, said:

The problem with that though is the new player experience in this game is nonexistent.

I'm fine with going back to MW4 and putting in size restrictions on weapon hardpoints.

I always felt the game was more tactical when you had to manage different ranges and weapon types... but I guess I'm in the minority if you look at the meta.

Yes, a game where you had tools to work with at every range is more tactical. The problem is that without a whole ton of asspull mechanics to try and force that style of play, it will never happen. It's the 'jack of all trades, master of none' problem. It's always more efficient to be great at one or two things than to be meh at almost everything. It's too bad the people who thought up CBT configs never figured that one out.