232 replies to this topic

[Gas Guzzler]

Madcap72, on 19 August 2015 - 02:39 PM, said:

Yea lasers are easy mode.



To really test your skill run LRM's and compete with terrain and ECM.

Ha ha ha ha

[Mainhunter]

I'm sure, my 3x Ultra Ac/5 jager will still inflict some damage.... just played a bit with an 2x Ultra AC/10 cat.... it's not bad at all.

[CDLord HHGD]

Mainhunter, on 19 August 2015 - 03:20 PM, said:

I'm sure, my 3x Ultra Ac/5 jager will still inflict some damage.... just played a bit with an 2x Ultra AC/10 cat.... it's not bad at all.

Though it's pretty sad when I round a corner and say "Oh thank GOD it's just a dakka Jager..."

[Jack Shayu Walker]

cdlord, on 19 August 2015 - 05:26 PM, said:

Though it's pretty sad when I round a corner and say "Oh thank GOD it's just a dakka Jager..."

I have never done that, not for a 3x UAC5 Jagger. For an AC2 Jagger? sure.

[Kubernetes]

I'm coming around to the view that there should be a much lower heat cap (say 30) and increased dissipation rate (say about 2.5x current rate). The lower cap would prevent obnoxious alphas, while dissipation rates would allow people to fire more often, but staggered. A huge problem with the heat system is that heat values are based on a 10-second TT turn, whereas the cap in MWO can be more than double TT values. That absolutely encourages massive alphas followed by long cooldowns

[lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol]

cdlord, on 17 August 2015 - 06:39 AM, said:

No specific mechs, no specific faction, no specific side, no specific laser, no specific quirk; as it should be.

Lasers across the board need substantial nerfs.

When I see 90% of mechs in matches run laserboats, there's something wrong. Had the honor of getting stomped by a well known comp group and guess what, they were all running laserboats. Nary a missile or AC among them.

And a nerf doesn't even have to apply to a laser, could be a general heat rescale.

#bringthehatred

With respect...

if it's a well known comp group, they could probably boat AC's, or even bring out all missile boats and still wreck the other team. Hell, chances are they could take one weapon from each group and STILL figure out a way to destroy other teams with ease. Why? Teamwork is more OP than any weapon in the game, especially when they've played together day and night, for weeks and months and everyone already has preset plans, knows their roles, the maps, where they're going, and their mechs before they drop into the game.

The other reason of why boating the same type of weapons works so well is because the range of engagement is no longer mixed because of multiple weapon systems. I remember a while ago being with a great group of people where we all decided to boat ERPPC's. Nothing else. Guess what? It was super effective, and super funny.

I really wish if one of these days I could get a decent 12 man group on board and experiment boating nothing but LBX weapons and having 12 mechs focus firing at the heads.

[spectralthundr]

00ohDstruct, on 19 August 2015 - 07:57 PM, said:

With respect...

if it's a well known comp group, they could probably boat AC's, or even bring out all missile boats and still wreck the other team. Hell, chances are they could take one weapon from each group and STILL figure out a way to destroy other teams with ease. Why? Teamwork is more OP than any weapon in the game, especially when they've played together day and night, for weeks and months and everyone already has preset plans, knows their roles, the maps, where they're going, and their mechs before they drop into the game.

The other reason of why boating the same type of weapons works so well is because the range of engagement is no longer mixed because of multiple weapon systems. I remember a while ago being with a great group of people where we all decided to boat ERPPC's. Nothing else. Guess what? It was super effective, and super funny.

I really wish if one of these days I could get a decent 12 man group on board and experiment boating nothing but LBX weapons and having 12 mechs focus firing at the heads.

If it's a well known comp group, well really a particular one the trainer does the work for them.

[CDLord HHGD]

@#206/#207

It's a symptom of the true problem. My real and only enemy is meta. Always has been and I suspect it always will be.

I MUST say though, that since the patch (dropped last night, the first time since the patch) matches were MUCH better. The wins, the losses, even the stomps (both ways) were still fun. Still plenty of laser vomit but I was actually killed by an AC20 once. It's a breath of fresh air!

Hopefully most the hacker L33T meta tryhards are in their own tier beating the tar out of each other..... If that's tier 1, then so be it.

[Widowmaker1981]

Kubernetes, on 19 August 2015 - 06:33 PM, said:

I'm coming around to the view that there should be a much lower heat cap (say 30) and increased dissipation rate (say about 2.5x current rate). The lower cap would prevent obnoxious alphas, while dissipation rates would allow people to fire more often, but staggered. A huge problem with the heat system is that heat values are based on a 10-second TT turn, whereas the cap in MWO can be more than double TT values. That absolutely encourages massive alphas followed by long cooldowns

In that system, where ALL weapons are DPS weapons, why the hell would you ever use lasers when you can shake the ever living crap out of your opponent with ACs, do more dps and generate no heat? Lasers are Alpha weapons (because high dmg/ton) and ACs are DPS weapons (because high dmg/heat and low cooldown)

Imo, adjust some of the more insane IS energy quirks (TDR-5SS) and nerf the range on the C-ERML to 325 ish

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 20 August 2015 - 08:29 AM.

[Almond Brown]

After reading many threads now about "heat" and it effects in MWO, I still a ton of players shutting down over and over, just in order to try and squeeze that extra 4 points of Alpha in their builds. I wonder if these players have ever thought that perhaps a Mech that is short that 4 pts. of Alpha but shut down rarely or ever in a firefight, is way ahead in the long run.

So is a build considered bad/poor when it has a in MechLab Heat rating of 1.45 - 1.60 but is not a crazy 60-70pt. Alpha striker, but also does not shut down after 2 trigger pulls, or blows itself up after using the "O" key for 3 seconds...

[M4rtyr]

Kubernetes, on 19 August 2015 - 06:33 PM, said:

I'm coming around to the view that there should be a much lower heat cap (say 30) and increased dissipation rate (say about 2.5x current rate). The lower cap would prevent obnoxious alphas, while dissipation rates would allow people to fire more often, but staggered. A huge problem with the heat system is that heat values are based on a 10-second TT turn, whereas the cap in MWO can be more than double TT values. That absolutely encourages massive alphas followed by long cooldowns

Actually more so there need to be penalties for when your heat is pegged at 90% for the whole match. If people couldn't hit crap or had ammo go boom they wouldn't run lazervomit alphas.

[FupDup]

M4rtyr, on 20 August 2015 - 01:16 PM, said:

Actually more so there need to be penalties for when your heat is pegged at 90% for the whole match. If people couldn't hit crap or had ammo go boom they wouldn't run lazervomit alphas.

Laser vomit doesn't use ammo bro, so ammo explosions actually hurt mixed builds but do absolutely nothing to laser boats.

[CDLord HHGD]

FupDup, on 20 August 2015 - 01:18 PM, said:

Laser vomit doesn't use ammo bro, so ammo explosions actually hurt mixed builds but do absolutely nothing to laser boats.

You are technically correct (the best kind of correct btw) but I get what he's saying. Others have posted (in this very thread in fact) heat scales that give drawbacks to high heat. Speed/agility, RoF, blurred vision (for the pilot, damn hot out...), to sooner internal damage...

[M4rtyr]

FupDup, on 20 August 2015 - 01:18 PM, said:

Laser vomit doesn't use ammo bro, so ammo explosions actually hurt mixed builds but do absolutely nothing to laser boats.

Hence why I said the first part 'if they can't hit crap' then the pure lazer boats have a disadvantage too... doesn't change that they sorely need penalties to high heat.

Edit: Don't know if it fits in the lazer meta, but even AMS ammo pops.

Edited by M4rtyr, 20 August 2015 - 01:30 PM.

[Richter Kerensky]

instead of crying for laser nerfs why don't they go the other way and make ballistics better. make them lighter and take fewer critical slots and give em more ammo per ton as a start.

the ac/2 just sucks, it needs to fire faster, generate less heat, the projectile probably needs to be faster. it's garbage

ac/5 is in the best place right now out of the acs, having more ammo per ton would be nice

ac/10 can probably work if it's lighter and takes fewer slots and has more ammo per ton

ac/20 is okay but it'd be nice to have the same stuff

gauss is good

on that note, though, clan gauss is ridiculous, its just straight up better than is gauss, same weapon but lighter and takes up less space, a rifle explosion won't kill you because of built-in case, it has no downsides whatsoever. if you're going to do that make the is one the same so you can do cool stuff like 3x gauss king crabs.

Edited by Richter Kerensky, 20 August 2015 - 01:50 PM.

[Viges]

It's sad that people don't support the idea of Laser Reflective Armor...

[NeoAres]

Lasers aren't that great. They're just the most effective boating weapon currently available. If they were nerfed, another weapon would take (or retake) priority as the preferred boating weapon, like PPCs, or LRMs again, or SRMs, or SSRMs. Regardless of what weapon system you choose, people are best off boating it.

The real problem is that there are too many incentives to boat in general. Some of these are unavoidable, but some of them are just unintentional side effects of PGI constructs.

Here's a list of reasons why boating a single weapon system is superior
1. Equal velocity, range, duration, and recycle enable overwhelming alpha strikes with minimal skill or effort. This is an unchangeable advantage. Even by itself, this will encourage most people to choose boating as their preferred build style.
2. Weapon Modules (or to be more specific, the limited number of weapon module slots) provide boosts to individual weapon systems. On most mechs, only one weapon type can be fully upgraded with the slots available, so boating that weapon ensures maximum efficiency of the weapon module system.
3. Mech Quirks have been installed on most mechs that apply automatic advantages to single weapon classes (or in some cases, sub-classes even) that, just like the weapon modules, encourage boating of that weapon class in order to maximize the effect of the bonus. The effect is even more drastic for clan mechs, as mechbuilders are encouraged not only to homogenize their loadouts, but also to homogenize their omnipod setups to achieve the maximum bonus.

If we eliminate weapon modules and weapon-buffing mech/omnipod quirks, the advantages of boating, while not fully countered, are extremely diminished. So what can we do to counter the inherent boat-culture beyond that? Well, PGI tried ghost heat, and while I'm not a big fan of totally "out of nowhere" balancers like that, it was pretty effective at preventing the ERLL and ERPPC boat from being a thing. Unfortunately, it only really works for those two weapon systems--laser boats still exist alive and well at medium and short ranges, and expanding ghost heat further is a ****** answer. Furthermore, it would just pave the way for gauss boats to take priority, as heat is never a factor for them.

So what can be done? Well, there's an easy solution, though I doubt it'll be popular. The inherent advantages of boating are exacerbated in MWO because of the big differences in weapon performance. If we diminish those differences, the positive result is that alpha-ing a combination of weapons will be as effective as alpha-ing a single weapon system. The negative result is that we will truly have created "Alphawarrior Online," like some joke about. Think MW4 for those who played it: SSRMs were insta-lock and therefore could be combo alpha'd with lasers easily. PPCs and ballistics all pretty much had the same velocity so combo alphas with them was just as effective as laser alphas. Lasers didn't have any duration to contend with, so even putting together a quick one-two punch with them and ballistics was easy. Combo alphas were every bit as potent as homogenous alphas, so boating was never a strong complaint. However, PGI has been trying to take us in the opposite direction from Alphawarrior Online for quite some time, as is readily apparent by all the effort they go through to create differences between weapon systems.

So that leaves the hard solution, coming up with a way to reward players for not boating. For that, I'll borrow a lesson from RTS games. In RTS, it's typical that every unit has other units that it's best against, and units that it's not as effective against. By applying a unique advantage to each weapon subclass, we have the ability to create combos that are more universally effective than a boat that employs just one weapon type. Here are the changes I would make to each weapon system...

Lasers: No change necessary. Lasers are already easy to use, high-damage, low-focus weapons, but the key is that their disruption ability is essentially zero with no "kick" to the target and little visual impairment unless the shot hits the cockpit. This is important for setting up contrasts with other weapons.
PPCs: In contrast, PPCs would be the most disrupting weapon system in the game. A hit from a PPC would not only disrupt ECM as it does now, but also would short out the HUD for a second or two and reset the target's TIG timer to boot. Oh, and it would totally have kick to it as well. To offset this disruption advantage, I would reduce the PPC's critical hit chance to 0%
Gauss: Gauss is the sniper wonderweapon, capable of accurate shots at great range with nearly zero heat. I'd also increase its kick somewhat. It's drawback, besides the charge-up, is that its critical hit chance would also be reduced to 0%.
ACs/UACs: would remain unchanged. They'd be the middle-of-the-road option, with normal critical hit %, decent disruption ability thanks to the high kick and flash, and good damage with relatively low heat.
LBXs: In addition to its already-increased critical hit %, I would add that each pellet would do 2X damage against internal structure, making the LBX a superior ranged choice over its rivals against already-damaged opponents.
SRMs/SSRMs: I would have them receive the same crit % and IS damage boosts as LBX and the same kick and flash effects as heavy ACs, making them superior to both at short range. However, the disadvantage is that AMS would (finally) be able to swat them out of the sky.
MGs: Enhancing the LBX's bonus, MGs would be the ultimate crit weapon with 4X damage against internal structure. However, the drawback is that they would do only 1/2X damage against armor, keeping them confined to a niche support role.
LRMs: Unique weapon. No change needed.
Flamers: Nobody uses flamers. No change needed.

By making some weapons better for disruption, some better for armor damage, some better for IS/crit damage, some better for deterring lights, and some susceptible to AMS/ECM, we create a scenario where a combination of PPC, lasers, and SSRMs (for instance) could be a more effective fighter than a boat build of any one of those weapon systems. They would be harder to use, of that there is no doubt, and many elite and novice players alike would still choose to boat because of its ease of use (just like many RTS players will choose to just make a mob of tanks rather than use combined-arms warfare), but those willing to take the time to master complex builds would reap the advantages of those combos.

Edited by NeoAres, 20 August 2015 - 03:02 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

cdlord, on 19 August 2015 - 04:40 AM, said:

@IraqiWalker

Normally I agree with a lot of your viewpoints, but you've got sized hardpoints all wrong. At this stage, anything to curtail the min/maxer metawarriors is a good thing. So far quirks and nerfs are a failure and TTK is still too low.

Sized Hardpoints
Two categories, Large and Small. Large HPs can equip weapons in the Small category but Small HPs cannot equip weapons in the Large category.
Small: TAG, SL, ML, MG, AC2, AC5, NARC, SRM2, SRM4, LRM5, LRM10.
Large: LL, PPC, AC10, AC20, Gauss, SRM6, LRM15, LRM20.
These include the variations of the weapons, ER/Pulse/UAC/Streak/Artemis.

Challenge
Go to Smurphy's and build a mech that isn't meta and that would be ruined by this. Seriously, I've done the math but I'm not the only brain in the pool. I want to see what you come up with and I want to compare.
Message me the link (so we don't keep adding to this thread for this specific activity). I'll update this post with your handle and submission and my response.
======================================================================

If you use these sizes while adhering to stock mechs, you will NEVER be able to stop boating. Most boated weapons are 1-2 slots, thus you solve no issue. Other than when someone decides that those slots which are dedicated to UAC5s, can't all be dumped for the sake of putting in one big UAC 20, an arguably far less meta set up.

In the case of a Jagermech, can you make me a build with your sized hardpoints that invalidates the 3xUAC5 set up, while not invalidating the 2xAC 20 set up?

The problem here is that you're the one that needs to present a layout that will adhere to stock mechs, WITHOUT allowing meta set ups, which is nigh on impossible. That much I can confirm. If you stick to stock layouts, congratulations, you won't stop boating, you won't stop alpha strikes, and you certainly won't curtail damage output.

Again: Only builds that will be affected by this are ones that use the larger ballistic weapons.

You're the one making the claim that this system will actually solve issues (in a very indirect, and roundabout way, compared to direct solutions to the problems), and yet no evidence has been presented to support the claim. The burden of proof lies with you, and those that support this system.

Make me a practical layout for a variant, that will do what you claim the system will do.

I'm the one saying it will fail, and if you are correct and I don't understand your system, then I need a working example, that I can critique/fine tune. So far, all you have is a hypothesis, display proof, and submit it for review.

Dimento Graven, on 19 August 2015 - 09:02 AM, said:

WRONG!

What is needed is an ACTUAL heat affects table, THAT is the problem with all the massive boat builds we currently have.

What we have is this:

What we NEED is something like this:

This would curtail the "alpha often" mentality a lot more than sized hardpoints. At least it will actually stop people from using alpha strikes often, instead of still letting them alpha strike 24/7, just for 10 points of damage less (10 points I hardly doubt the sized hardpoints system would actually incur).

Dimento Graven, on 19 August 2015 - 02:44 PM, said:

Congratulations, you've earned my standard LRM reply:

LRM sk1llz:

1. Put little circle in big square.
2. Wait for big circle.
3. Pull trigger.

LRM l33t sk1llz:
1. Put little circle in big square.
2a. Am I Clan: is range less than 1000-1100 meters?
2b. Am I IS: is range more than 180 meters and less than 1000 - 1100 meters?
3. Wait for big circle.
4. Pull trigger.
5. Keep big circle inside little big square.

Anyway... You made me laugh out loud, thank you sir!

Look, competitive set ups are the easy mode of the game. In fact, LRMs require a lot more skills to use than that.

Specifically speaking, we need actual map awareness, of both the locations of enemies, and teammates, but also the geographical layout of the map. I need to know more than what's in front of me because direct fire weapons are akin to combat with blinders on. You need no real awareness other than what's in front of you, and some rudimentary awareness of your surroundings.

We can get into this in greater detail later.

LRMs are not in a good place yes, but who here remembers when they were the easy mode? Every one cried endless tears until they got a 5 second heads up whenever LRMs are incoming, and projectiles slower than AC 20 bullets, and STILL we got LRM complaint threads.

I only had 1 LRM boat, but at least I'm honest. Easy mode is direct fire weapons.

[FatYak]

Chados, on 17 August 2015 - 02:59 PM, said:

it's ECM and advanced zoom that need nerfs.

lol....wut?

[Dimento Graven]

IraqiWalker, on 20 August 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:

...
Look, competitive set ups are the easy mode of the game. In fact, LRMs require a lot more skills to use than that.

Not much more. You're talking to someone who spent a year relegated to LRM builds due to not having a machine capable of maintaining a frame rate necessary for real brawling or reliable sniping.

From my own first hand experience, LRM usage requires low skill, low risk, but often results in high reward. My first ace of spades was with a LRM boat...

Quote

Specifically speaking, we need actual map awareness, of both the locations of enemies, and teammates, but also the geographical layout of the map. I need to know more than what's in front of me because direct fire weapons are akin to combat with blinders on. You need no real awareness other than what's in front of you, and some rudimentary awareness of your surroundings.

I think you're seriously over stating it. Only a vague map awareness is necessary, considering your firing indirectly and more often than not the target can be off your own mini map, 'map awareness' is little more than, "DO I SEE A LARGE OBJECT IMMEDIATELY IN FRONT OF ME?", other than that, it's not map awareness, but the minute knowledge that you should watch your target reticule to flash red for hit registry. If no red, you're not hitting your target. I wouldn't say that requires a 'lot' of skill... Your generalization of direct fire weapons as playing with 'blinders on' can really only be said of sniping where tunnel vision is a common issue you have to be mindful of, but ultimately it's really true of any said weapons. You have people focusing on some longer ranged target only to miss the very obvious closer by enemy that's coming up in plain sight...

Quote

...

LRMs are not in a good place yes, but who here remembers when they were the easy mode? Every one cried endless tears until they got a 5 second heads up whenever LRMs are incoming, and projectiles slower than AC 20 bullets, and STILL we got LRM complaint threads.

LRMs are fine as is. Or are you not noticing during specific challenges how the population of LRM boats jumps exponentially?

Quote

I only had 1 LRM boat, but at least I'm honest. Easy mode is direct fire weapons.

I have probably upwards of 10 different LRM boats, and I know I'm honest when I say, they ARE absolutely easy mode.

I play sniper builds now, I'm working my way towards completing the guillotine achievement, and I can tell you, it's less risky and less stressful playing a LRM boat than a sniper.