186 replies to this topic

[Sharfen]

Uh... I have not been playing long but I play lights almost exclusively. It's probably mentioned elsewhere but I couldn't find anything, has there been a nerf to our hitboxes? It's like I take full damage from everything that touches me now. I was killed in just three hits last night, today it took four hits. It's happening in just about every light I drive. Shoot even my Cicada is squishy now.

It could just be me driving like crap, but the love is fading for MWO. I don't like driving slow mechs and lights are nothing but party balloons at a tack factory. I don't think I've managed to survive long enough since the patch to break 200 damage.

[Y E O N N E]

It's actually your driving. "Don't get seen" should be the creed you live by. Don't scout too far ahead, and know how to pick your fights. Try not to engage until the target is engaged by a larger ally. If you are attempting an assassination, leave if the enemy turns to see what shot him and either bait him back into a false sense of security or move on to another target. Always be skimming for stragglers.

In all seriousness, I recommend dropping in Locusts exclusively until you can regularly earn 400+. Use the LCT-1E. It will be a hard teacher, but it will force you to learn how to stay invisible in order to stay combat effective. If you can do well in the Locust, you can do well (better) in any other fast light after minor adjusting.

[TwentyOne]

FupDup, on 11 April 2015 - 09:24 AM, said:

Long story short, MWO inherits the Battletech situation of higher mech tonnage = better.

You used lights (or mediums) in BT when you didn't have enough spacebucks to maintain a heavy or assault. If you did have that money, you didn't really use lights or mediums, because they were less effective (assuming equal tech/optimization/etc).

Also, because you commanded a small force instead of a single unit, you could simply outnumber the enemy fatties. A Zergling might not beat a Zealot in 1 on 1, but you could have a lot more Zerglings than your enemy could have Zealots.


This doesn't apply in MWO because you only get 12 mechs at a time, so we need to make Zerglings actually as viable as Zealots. So far PGI has made more attempts at this than previous MW games, but still hasn't fully succeeded at it.

We need to REMOVE THE FIRESTARTER FROM MWO. Then lights can all be easily buffed without making them hyper OP.

[FupDup]

TwentyOne, on 13 April 2015 - 03:07 PM, said:

We need to REMOVE THE FIRESTARTER FROM MWO. Then lights can all be easily buffed without making them hyper OP.

That would only happen if we did some kind of blanket adjustment to all of them equally. Using PGI's current preferred method of Quirkening, that isn't really an issue because it lets us single out specific mechs and tweak them by different amounts each.

[Sharfen]

Yeonne Greene, on 13 April 2015 - 03:02 PM, said:

It's actually your driving. "Don't get seen" should be the creed you live by. Don't scout too far ahead, and know how to pick your fights. Try not to engage until the target is engaged by a larger ally. If you are attempting an assassination, leave if the enemy turns to see what shot him and either bait him back into a false sense of security or move on to another target. Always be skimming for stragglers.

In all seriousness, I recommend dropping in Locusts exclusively until you can regularly earn 400+. Use the LCT-1E. It will be a hard teacher, but it will force you to learn how to stay invisible in order to stay combat effective. If you can do well in the Locust, you can do well (better) in any other fast light after minor adjusting.

Thanks much for the input. I just did three matches in a row (before I noticed your post) in my JR7-O (ShRMp Boat). I got over 400 in two matches and over 600 in the other with six total kills. I took some hits but kept moving for the most part. I could be just having off games. I tend to go in streaks of good or bad.

[TercieI]

TwentyOne, on 13 April 2015 - 03:07 PM, said:

We need to REMOVE THE FIRESTARTER FROM MWO. Then lights can all be easily buffed without making them hyper OP.

LOL.

If you're serious: ROFLMAO.

[Mawai]

Durant Carlyle, on 11 April 2015 - 09:30 AM, said:

The game was better with quad-3 matchmaker. Especially when it matched ton-for-ton.

LOL.

1) The game STILL has a quad-3 matchmaker in case you haven't noticed. That is the default configuration and a substantial number of matches ARE 3/3/3/3. However, the current matchmaker has release valves to prevent queue starvation issues so you WILL get non 3/3/3/3 matches so that most folks can get a match in a reasonable time frame.

2) The game has NEVER matched ton for ton. There was discussion about adding this feature but as far as I know it NEVER made it to live since it causes queue starvation ... you never have enough mechs of the identical tonnage to force 1:1 tonnage matching.

3) When they tested the first iteration of 3/3/3/3 the heavy queue wait time was up over an hour in less than 30 minutes which forced a re-write of a significant fraction of the matchmaker. 3/3/3/3 only works if you have a perfect distribution of players ... PGI initially thought that 3/3/3/3 would force players to adapt ... lol ... not enough to prevent huge queues and unacceptable wait times though.



However,

[Deathlike]

Ton-for-ton never happened. Only "weight class matching" was introduced previously.

The difference between then and now is the # of mechs we have now.... but the exception would be Clan Mechs where the options are limited in scope.

[Telmasa]

Jacobei, on 13 April 2015 - 07:18 AM, said:

So your idea of MWO is for no one to play lights. You just want them to be easy targets? We should all just stand 500-800m and alpha each others Heavy Mechs....

To be honest I never had any but most of the FS9's I kill in my kitfox or spider are due to overheating. They can't keep the fight on long enough or get frustrated and try to alpha a leg.

Uh, no. You just chose to swing from one extreme to the other.

What I don't want is for Firestarters to be able to compete on even footing with anything above 40 tons. If it surpasses that point, then it's breaking any semblance of balance the game has. If you want to be meaner, you have to be heavier - if things were balanced correctly.

The only Firestarters that ought to be overheating are stock ones - that or the pilot is just starting to figure out heat management.

[Mirumoto Izanami]

Telmasa, on 13 April 2015 - 04:33 PM, said:

What I don't want is for Firestarters to be able to compete on even footing with anything above 40 tons.

[Burktross]

Telmasa, on 13 April 2015 - 04:33 PM, said:

Uh, no. You just chose to swing from one extreme to the other.

What I don't want is for Firestarters to be able to compete on even footing with anything above 40 tons. If it surpasses that point, then it's breaking any semblance of balance the game has. If you want to be meaner, you have to be heavier - if things were balanced correctly.

The only Firestarters that ought to be overheating are stock ones - that or the pilot is just starting to figure out heat management.

"gtfo lights get big or get rekt"

[Yokaiko]

Burktross, on 13 April 2015 - 04:41 PM, said:

"gtfo lights get big or get rekt"

Closed beta all over again, actually much later, why do you think we have base turrets now?

[ShinVector]

MEh.... To all the lights QQ... The only thing OP right now is still bad hit reg and 'BAD AIM.'

Once that is fixed... All lights would get wreck.

But of course better pilots already have the solution for that.... With all the silly quirks nowdays.. We play the mid range game.. LOL.

[Yokaiko]

ShinVector, on 13 April 2015 - 04:47 PM, said:

MEh.... To all the lights QQ... The only thing OP right now is still bad hit reg and 'BAD AIM.'

Once that is fixed... All lights would get wreck.

But of course better pilots already have the solution for that.... With all the silly quirks nowdays.. We play the mid range game.. LOL.

Not really the long and the short is DAMGE > everything else. Lights have to work a LOT harder to get a big damage number.

So path of least resistance and all of that.

[stjobe]

Telmasa, on 13 April 2015 - 04:33 PM, said:

What I don't want is for Firestarters to be able to compete on even footing with anything above 40 tons. If it surpasses that point, then it's breaking any semblance of balance the game has. If you want to be meaner, you have to be heavier - if things were balanced correctly.

You do realise this is a one person, one 'mech online PvP game, right?

If Firestarters (or any other 'mech, really) couldn't "compete on even footing" - what would be the point of ever playing them?

I've seen this argument from time to time all the way back to closed beta, and it always falls apart when someone asks "if tonnage determines the combat outcome, what point is there to run any 'mech that weighs less than 100 tons?".

Pilot skill should determine combat outcome, not tonnage - and the way to do that is to do precisely what you propose not to; allow each and every 'mech in the game to "compete on even footing".

We're already at a point where roughly 75% of players choose heavy or assault 'mechs, do we really need to punish light and medium 'mechs further?

[bad arcade kitty]

well, honestly lights and assaults have ~similar numbers of players who are waiting on them in the queue, if those numbers on the button are correct. lights have a decent popularity, medium mechs are the most underplayed, heavies are the most played... when i check those numbers are (on average) 30-40% heavies, ~20-25% assaults, same, or a bit less for lights, 15-20% for mediums

Edited by bad arcade kitty, 13 April 2015 - 08:53 PM.

[operatorZ]

Adiuvo, on 12 April 2015 - 01:03 PM, said:

They can't really mess up the hitboxes of a humanoid mech with arms. It has superior weaponry, ECM, and a clan XL. It's basically guaranteed to be better than a FS9.

As for OP, if you consider OP to mean better than everything in the class, then yes it will be OP. In terms of overall game impact... well it's still a light mech. Without changes to the agility mechanics in this game lights will always have less of a game impact compared to the normal hitters.

As they should. Based on the current incarnation of the game mechanics and balance .....sans real role warfare

Changes to the agility mechanics? To make them even deadlier then they are? Pffff...me thinks lights have plenty of agility...plenty

And no I don't have a problem with them

[operatorZ]

stjobe, on 13 April 2015 - 08:27 PM, said:

You do realise this is a one person, one 'mech online PvP game, right?

If Firestarters (or any other 'mech, really) couldn't "compete on even footing" - what would be the point of ever playing them?

I've seen this argument from time to time all the way back to closed beta, and it always falls apart when someone asks "if tonnage determines the combat outcome, what point is there to run any 'mech that weighs less than 100 tons?".

Pilot skill should determine combat outcome, not tonnage - and the way to do that is to do precisely what you propose not to; allow each and every 'mech in the game to "compete on even footing".

We're already at a point where roughly 75% of players choose heavy or assault 'mechs, do we really need to punish light and medium 'mechs further?

I always know %someone is full of it when they drag out the old tired "but if lights were OP how come que less than 10%" argument.

Punish? Punish? Really?

Please oh please let my favorite class drop to 1% in the que so I can get games all day erey day with no wait times.

If you want to play lights good for you.

But don't pretend that they aren't extremely deadly and effective in the right hands...just like every mech of every class everywhere anywhere. But every time somebody points this out it "oh noes but the light que is only 5%!!!!" And "guess you have a problem with lights..n000b"

Honestly...in the absence of real role warfare that would see lights used for what they are designed for this is a pretty good spot to be in for light balance right now IMO

[Escef]

bad arcade kitty, on 13 April 2015 - 08:52 PM, said:

well, honestly lights and assaults have ~similar numbers of players who are waiting on them in the queue, if those numbers on the button are correct. lights have a decent popularity, medium mechs are the most underplayed, heavies are the most played... when i check those numbers are (on average) 30-40% heavies, ~20-25% assaults, same, or a bit less for lights, 15-20% for mediums

Right now the queue percentages are little off by people tooling around in Urbies. This happens most of the time new mechs are released (there are exceptions, such as when less than splashy mechs release, e.g. the Vindicators). When the first half of the resistance pack hit the light and medium portions of the queue skyrocketed due to the flood of Panthers and Enforcers.

[ShinVector]

Yokaiko, on 13 April 2015 - 04:49 PM, said:

Not really the long and the short is DAMGE > everything else. Lights have to work a LOT harder to get a big damage number.

So path of least resistance and all of that.

Nahhhh... I just got a different view of things when it comes to risk vs. rewards.
1. Short is damage yes. Expose yourself to high ELO players. Boom there goes a leg or side torso. ggclose.
2. Longer range is a benefit to lights simple because they are small. Harder to be hit from range. More likely to survive the poke and shoot from cover. Anyway this is why the ERLL ECM Raven gameplay exists.

I think some one has cover earlier like. MPLS being preferred over SPLS in competitive for the added range and hit and run ability.

For lower engine cap mechs like the Panther... LPLS preferred for added safety or range and harder hitting power at range.

--

But OH yes.. Lights does have to work a lot harder to get damage compared to QQ assault mech pilots.

Edited by ShinVector, 13 April 2015 - 11:11 PM.