Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
You still need balance. Not "This mech is equal to that mech"; but "this mech is worth <the assigned battlevalue>".
the value is dynamically calculated according to loadout not per mech so an all flamer mad cat would have a vasty different BV than a laser gauss mad cat.
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
The later is no easier than the former, because if you can say "Mech X is worth 900pts and Mech Y is worth 1000pts" with accuracy, you could have (not saying this is a better situation, but it was PGI's goal) buffed Mech X to be worth 1000pts, say with quirks.
it is not supposed to work that way mech DONT get flat values.
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
The trouble, however, is accurately assigning points to mech power is non-trivial, because mech power is an enormously complicated beast.
lets have a look a dire prime is worth 8901 points combat value, if you are off by a few hundred points is inconsequential then...
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
Because I have two brain cells to rub together.
I am sure you have more...
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
An Awesome is a great chassis in tabletop. But tabletop has no concept of mech geometry, while mech geometry is critical in MWO. Right there, TT chassis point values are totally garbage.
Geometry and hitboxes are mainly a defensive function. BV would incorporate an offensive function (basically the damage you do in a given time frame) and a defensive function (basically the damage needed until you fold) calculating both is hideously easy you just have to add numbers. The geometry and hitboxes are just a modifier to that basic amount and mainly for the defensive part. you can do several approches to that modifyer.
The easiest is simply counting pixel from the front and from the back.
You can also easily add quirks to that, quirks that improve structure /Armor are just added like armor or structure points.
Quirks that increase cadence just increase the damage as if the weapon fires more often. Movement quirk just add to the engine rating making the engine having more points than it would have without quirks, and so on.
TT is not assigning BV to a chassis but to each equipment and then its simply added up. A chassis cost is simply the sum of its parts.
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
Weapons? A PPC is a strong weapon in Tabletop. It's kinda junky in MWO right now, because it's extremely difficult to use accurately due to low projectile speed.... Another factor that's entirely absent in Tabletop.
that is pilot skill.
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
They all fire once per game turn. They all hit random target locations. There is no convergene! No burn times! Mechwarrior Online is, functionally, an entirely different game from Tabletop, no matter what similarities remain.
again that is valid for all weapons so you can simply use the same approach for all it is combat POTENTIAL. How much dmg you can actually do is up to you... pilot skill
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
Did you read my post at all?
I even quoted it...
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
IF IT WORKED, it'd be great. Conceptually, battlevalue is awesome. But it's essentially impossible to implement in MWO quickly enough, at a reasonable enough dev-cost, and it's totally unreasonable to expect it to be near balanced enough to work.
I disagree, the workings are easy since, many things are already existing. (community has even counted the pixels of each mech from front and side!) Balance can be improved and will have several iterations but it will be invariably better than it is now.
Now is
locust = Cheatah;
Cicada = Stormcrow
Mad Cat = Quickdraw
Awesome = Daishi (Dire wolf)
It is hardly possible that they can make it worse in their first try.
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
You can't just calculate DPS stats to determine weapon value. In TT you can (and they do!) but you can't here, because our weapons are nothing like tabletop weapons.
You've also go accuracy - how much does hitscan weigh, in absolute numbers of points (or even percentage of points) against varying projectile speed? What about tracking (SSRM, LRM)? What about bullet drop? How does the value of an AC10 change if it doesn't have bullet drop?
All these things are essentially: "does the pilot hit the target". That is pilot skill !
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
Now you've got physical geometry - something else that doesn't happen in TT. An Awesome is a great mech in TT, because it's no easier or harder to hit than anything else. Hitboxes, too. Everyone's seen how much hitboxes can impact how good a mech is.
That is the only thing that they cannot easily add up. But they can for example count the pixel of a mech front and side. Also geometry is quantifyable for example how much percentage of a mech is CT from sides and front. same for ST. and so on...
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
How much more is a E and Ballistic hardpoints like the Firebrands arms worth vs. the AS7-DDC's RT Ballistics and GorrilaArms worth? How does 2B in the RT compare to, say, 1B in the RT and 1B in the LT? Same number of hardpoints, but different use.
Again count pixel how much of your mech surface area has to be shown to use the main weapons.
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
Engines. Is an XL worth the same in any chassis, regardless of hitboxes?
yes
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
can you basically use any engine without significantly impacting your overall BV?
no
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
Or, the other way, do minor engine changes change the overall BV too much, allowing you to downgrade your engine, take better weapons, and end up undercosted?
Any change in your mech changes its BV, it is NO flat BV for a chassis. So there cannot be any undercost.
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
Twist rate. Turn rate. How does your degrees per second turn rate (and remember, it's a curve based on speed and engine size) impact your BV? Does it relate well to engines?
Directly coupled to engine rating which already has BV cost.
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
If you don't account for them, then the resultant BV must be incorrect.
Since the same formula is used for all mechs it evens out... also there is no correct or incorrect... only balance
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
Finally, say they do. Say the magically Make It Happen, have great BV scoring. Then they change an underlying game mechanic. Maybe they make ECM worse (thus making tracking weapons better), or they alter how mechs move. Suddenly, all those formulas are wrong.
why should they change it if there is balance? If they make the ML doing 1 point more damage per minute then BV for each ML goes up by one. Does not need magic just mathematics.
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
In short: If the values for a BV system are wrong, the best result is poor matchups
cant be worse than now... see above
Wintersdark, on 05 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:
; but the worst result is that people can deliberately take undercosted setups where they have a mech much more
powerful than what it'll be matched against, because it's BV is under what it should be.
there cant be an undercost since even each point of armor is added and changes BV. It is NOT a chassis cost that gets a flat value no matter whats inside. Remember MM is not only BV it is BV times pilot skill...
Kjudoon, on 05 September 2015 - 04:18 PM, said:
Discounting others experiential evidence invalidates yours you know, Fire.
Its not my experiment it was PGIs experiment and it failed completely. Nothing that it was advertised to solve was solved.
Stomps are even now in solo queue as often as before you just dont have evil groups to blame it on.
I fear I have to go to bed its 3:00 here so good night everyone and read you tomorrow