385 replies to this topic

[50 50]

I would like to make the point that the change to laser range with the lock on was about finding a way to integrate the information warfare side of things with weapons.
It had nothing to do with Alphas.
Personally I thought it was quite a good idea and made a bit of sense.
If we look at how this same thought process might apply to other weapons, then I would suggest:
Cone of fire for solid shot ballistics such as AC, UAC, Gauss.
Increase the weapon spread for Missiles and LBx.
Increase the splash effect of PPCs so they have less concentrated damage.
Probably don't need to worry about flamers and MGs due to their very short range.
Pretty easy, but it's not what this topic is about.

Some of the suggestions in this thread only delay alphas.
I think the only real option is to reduce how many weapons can be fired at once in a group.
Same mechanic as the gauss rifle where you can't charge up more than two at a time.
The limit could be tied to the engine size so there is some logic behind it.
The larger the engine, the more weapons can be fired at once.
This balances itself to some degree as the larger the engine the less tonnage you have to play with.
We could then have different limits for different weapons if we really wanted to be complex.
Or perhaps we introduce a 'Weapon Energy Requirement'.
eg:
If engine size / 50 = "Sustainable Energy Output"
Weapons then have values such as a Gauss or PPC is worth 4 points.
A Large Laser might be 3.
You can only fire the weapon group if the total WER for the weapons is equal to or below the capacity the engine can manage.
Could be affected by a new mech quirk as well.
Be nice to add some functionality to the weapon groups so you could chain fire paired weapons if this was the direction taken.
But that to me seems a logical way to handle it.

Given that there is actually a key mapping for an alpha, more can be added to that function to emphasise the drastic nature of the action.
Perhaps it is an automatic shutdown.
Perhaps the charge used to power all the weapons means the engine can't produce enough power to move the mech as efficiently for a while. ie. take a movement and agility penalty for X seconds.

That might be an interesting way to handle it.

[Jettrik Ryflix]

Okay, assume for a second that PGI actually discovers and then effectively implements a system that removes high-alpha from the game.

Players will realize that their laser-boats aren't working anymore, and resort to the next best thing.

Suddenly there will be a resurgence of pop-tarts and LRM-spammers.

These same people complaining about alpha strikes will now be complaining about impossible pop-tarts and LRM rain.


The real solution is for PGI to continue working on AI and PvE, so that players who can't adapt to competitive gameplay can play single-player missions instead.

[Cy Mitchell]

Jettrik Ryflix, on 28 February 2016 - 10:21 AM, said:

Okay, assume for a second that PGI actually discovers and then effectively implements a system that removes high-alpha from the game.

Players will realize that their laser-boats aren't working anymore, and resort to the next best thing.

Suddenly there will be a resurgence of pop-tarts and LRM-spammers.

These same people complaining about alpha strikes will now be complaining about impossible pop-tarts and LRM rain.


The real solution is for PGI to continue working on AI and PvE, so that players who can't adapt to competitive gameplay can play single-player missions instead.

LOL. Condescending much?

[IraqiWalker]

Tabu 73, on 26 February 2016 - 09:14 PM, said:

To reiterate, if you wanted Lore than you shouldn't have allowed us to customize mechs much in the first place! If you hate stacked weapon systems like laser-boat mechs, or dakka mechs, then you shouldn't have put them in the game that allows you to customize their load-outs to begin with! Period!

Actually, if we wanted to go by LORE customization, then MWO is extremely restrictive. Battlemechs are infinitely customizable. The difference between them and Omnis is that omnis can be customized extremely quickly, but have a smaller range (for example, a battlemech can change it's structure, armor type, heat sink type, and engine, but an omni mech can't do that, and remain an omnimech. However, those upgrades would take months to be implemented on a battlemech, same with hardpoint swapping. However, it takes only a few hours to swap hardpoints on an omnimech)

Rampage, on 27 February 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

I do not disagree with this. Mechs that are built to do that pack a lot of heat sinks which limits the number of weapons they can carry. Therefore, their Alpha strike is not of the magnitude of some of the current meta lazer vomit builds. If you make enough sacrifices to be able to build a one button Mech then I am OK with it. I still think that there should be movement speed and torso twist penalties associated with exceeding or nearing the limit of your heat threshhold. Due to the fact that electronics hate heat, you could also experience sensor shut down of degraded sensors. I guess we will have to see how the newly announced heat system will deal with them. From what Russ said Alphas should become much much more rare. That is great news to me.

I'm with you 100%.

I'd go as far as mechs should be receiving penalties before reaching the limit. If a mech sustains 50% heat for 10 seconds, it should be suffering some movement penalties (if we want to use lore metrics).

[Karl Streiger]

Well they prototype an energy system - as far as i could read those freaking 140 letters its meant to add an additional "heat cap" - or how should i understand: overexceed energy threshhold and overheat.

Its my personal opinion and maybe I'm complete alone, but its complete nonsense:

Energy for heat or Energy and heat - will do only one thing, they will correct the Gauss Heat Disaster - and thats it.

When its hard enough to work - it will boost ACs... well you can have the same while reducing the heat treshhold.
And if its not enough its a waste of time

[IraqiWalker]

Karl Streiger, on 03 March 2016 - 05:31 AM, said:

Well they prototype an energy system - as far as i could read those freaking 140 letters its meant to add an additional "heat cap" - or how should i understand: overexceed energy threshhold and overheat.

Its my personal opinion and maybe I'm complete alone, but its complete nonsense:

Energy for heat or Energy and heat - will do only one thing, they will correct the Gauss Heat Disaster - and thats it.

When its hard enough to work - it will boost ACs... well you can have the same while reducing the heat treshhold.
And if its not enough its a waste of time

If they are going the implement the energy system I'm thinking of (there was a write up about it all the way back in 2014), then basically we'll have a power bar for the engine, and when you use weapons, they draw from that resource, which keeps on replenishing automatically.

For the sake of an example, let's say you have 100 energy, and a medium laser uses 10 energy. In that case, you'd be able to fire 10 MLs in one go with that power reserve (you'd have to deal with the heat penalties that come with it)

On the other hand, the Gauss Rifle uses 50 energy, for example. So you'd be able to fire it + 5 MLs. After which, you are at 0 energy, and have to wait until you have enough energy to fire weapons again.

I'm giving a rough example of how that system was suggested to work, but it would basically be that. Although, if lore is factored in, then clans would have less engine power (clan mechs were reported as having a lot of difficulty charging to Gauss Rifles simultaneously, because their compact engines don't generate as much power as the bulkier IS ones. They still generate more than enough to do everything else, other than charge two GRs at the same time.) Though I would personally be against such a nerf to the current iteration of clan mechs, and clan tech.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 03 March 2016 - 06:03 AM.

[The Great Unwashed]

Whatever happens, I hope they will test whatever it is they are trying to do... as they usually do not do very well, if at all

Edited by The Great Unwashed, 03 March 2016 - 06:17 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

IraqiWalker, on 03 March 2016 - 06:02 AM, said:

For the sake of an example, let's say you have 100 energy, and a medium laser uses 10 energy. In that case, you'd be able to fire 10 MLs in one go with that power reserve (you'd have to deal with the heat penalties that come with it)

On the other hand, the Gauss Rifle uses 50 energy, for example. So you'd be able to fire it + 5 MLs. After which, you are at 0 energy, and have to wait until you have enough energy to fire weapons again.

Thats the basic math and it looks good when you - well just skim the content.
But when you take a closer look:

Your Mech generate energy that causes heat (reloading all that stuff, as well as discharging)

have posted it prior in this topic:

Karl Streiger, on 08 February 2016 - 02:36 AM, said:

.... this is based on a discussion a while back in the bg.battletech forums. And i was pleased to see how simple they merge with MWO:

First: Energy production:

[list]
Energy Grid = Weight / 5 + SHS (if DHS the internals count as SHS)
 
Energy Production per sec = ReactorRating/100 + extern DHS/2
 
Energy Drain = Movement: "Thrust relative" * CubeRoot(Reactor Rating/Total Speed(kph))
 
JumpJets have to be coded that the jump time is depended on jump jets mounted (say 4 JJs = 4sec)
SQRT(Thrust/MechWeight)
 
non energy weapons = 0.5 * heat
Gauss = 10
energy weapon heat = energy

when the drain over exceed the grid bad things happen,

Example:

• MAD-5D
  
  • 300XL
    
  • 4 JJs
    
  • 12 Internals
    
  • 4 External DHS
    
  • 75tons
    
  • Energy for Jets (Root(75/4) = -4,3 per sec (-17.3 for 4sec))
    
  • GRID: 75/5+12 = 27
    
  • Generation: 300/100 + 4/2 = 5
    
  • movement 100% = -1.6
    
  • movement 50% = -1
    
  • drain TIC 1 (1 ERPPC = 15
    
  • drain TIC 2 (1 ERPPC = 15
    
  • drain TIC 3 (2MPLAS = 8)
    
  • drain TIC 4 (1 LPLAS = 7)
    
  • drain TIC 5 (1SSRM 2 = 1)
• Borat
  
  • 400XL
    
  • 20 Internals
    
  • 0 External
    
  • 100t
    
  • Grid = 100/5+20 = 40
    
  • Generation = 4
    
  • Movement 100% = 1.8
    
  • movement 50% = 1.1
    
  • drain TIC 1 (3 MPLAS = 12)
    
  • drain TIC 2 (3 MPLAS = 12)
    
  • drain TIC 3 (AC 10 = 1.5)
    
  • drain TIC 4 (LRM 10 = 2)

As you see its very easy to turn this system into a real working heat system, or turn the heat system in to an energy drain system

i have made some better examples and calculations in German, but i admit i'm to clumsy to calculate them again.
Of course you can - take the values and calculate some examples for yourself - i think those values work quiete good even for lights, and increase the value of Assaults.... but its still one system - call it heat or call it energy - doesn't matter.... but you don't need two systems.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 03 March 2016 - 06:31 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Jettrik Ryflix, on 28 February 2016 - 10:21 AM, said:

Okay, assume for a second that PGI actually discovers and then effectively implements a system that removes high-alpha from the game.

Players will realize that their laser-boats aren't working anymore, and resort to the next best thing.

Suddenly there will be a resurgence of pop-tarts and LRM-spammers.

These same people complaining about alpha strikes will now be complaining about impossible pop-tarts and LRM rain.


The real solution is for PGI to continue working on AI and PvE, so that players who can't adapt to competitive gameplay can play single-player missions instead.

No, this will only happen if the values chosen are bad.

if the chaneg si done properly lasers stay viable, but ridiculously large alphas disappear. The problem is that in all the discussion the value "alpha" is never described.

surely shooting 6 sl's isn't na alpha. as per problematic definition 2ppc and 2 gauss surely are. And like 5ML and 2 LPL are surely too. for ML's well not sure where the proper treshold are. But I would say as a first step the system. no matter what it is should rpevent triggering Firing volleys of damage above 30 or 40 damage. that woudl imporve a lot.

then see what new issues appear and adjust the system.

@Karl, sry but including the reactor to this is just plain out killing the balance even more. just take and compare soem of the inferior mechs to the current ones and tell me how this is going to not make the abyss between TBR and its competitors even bigger? Ontop it may force more IS players to go for XL engiens which for some chassis are just suicide.

So that change will again require energy quirks to fix just another stage of DOA mechs with this system. especially amongst those amazing "my engine and a crapload of bad fixed equipment no one needs " clanners.

IraqiWalker, on 03 March 2016 - 06:02 AM, said:

On the other hand, the Gauss Rifle uses 50 energy, for example. So you'd be able to fire it + 5 MLs. After which, you are at 0 energy, and have to wait until you have enough energy to fire weapons again.

that still is basically what heat just do, the issue is just that the heat/energy consumption is out of relation to the heat/energy treshold. Readjusting heat would have the same effect.

Edited by Lily from animove, 03 March 2016 - 09:23 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Intelligent, well thought out gameplay, coupled with proper scouting, is the solution.

[IraqiWalker]

Karl Streiger, on 03 March 2016 - 06:28 AM, said:

you don't need two systems.

Amen!

My position is that fixing the heat system would be a better solution. I'm also not going to completely shoot down the energy system, until I see a model they come up with, simply because I'm counting on a non zero chance that they might do it in a good way.

[Karl Streiger]

Lily from animove, on 03 March 2016 - 09:21 AM, said:

@Karl, sry but including the reactor to this is just plain out killing the balance even more. just take and compare soem of the inferior mechs to the current ones and tell me how this is going to not make the abyss between TBR and its competitors even bigger? Ontop it may force more IS players to go for XL engiens which for some chassis are just suicide.

So that change will again require energy quirks to fix just another stage of DOA mechs with this system. especially amongst those amazing "my engine and a crapload of bad fixed equipment no one needs " clanners.

• Nova Prime: 250 Engine 10 Internals 8 Externals
  
  • Grid 20 (50/5+10)
    
  • Production: 6.5 (250/100+ 8/2)
    
  • Movement -1,4
    
  • JJs 2.7 per second
    
  • 1 ER Medium Laser - Drain of 5
• Options:
  
  • don't move - fire 4 ER-M-Laser - wait 3sec - fire 4 ER-M-Laser
    
  • or move around and fire just 3 ER-M-Laser per volley (with 3-4sec per laser cooldown not very attractive)

The main issue with the Nova - its not a very attractive energy boat..not with a proper heat or energy system. To be fair i think the Nova Prime is just a hubris because somebody within fasa thought ist a good idea (its not - the Black Hawk KU has a much better configuration) - and its not a good idea to fire those 12 Lasers in current game play....

But other Nova Configs work very well: the A need ~3sec to time its shots for the ER-PPC
The Nova B - doesn't face any problems with its loadout

and there we are - the main goal is to reduce the alpha right - in weight (damage), frequence and of course the mono build.

Any more restrictive system that increase the value of less weapons but those with increased frequency may be worth looking.

About the engine (well its one of the graver mistakes of PGI to just take the engine values and keep the output the same -seriously we are talking about 34,5t for the change of 15m/s towards 18m/s for an Atlas mounting a 400STD instead of a 300. There should be a nonlinear slight increase of speed the higher the engine rating is. (Of course that means that the TimberWolf is slightly faster than the Summoner - but the Gargoyle is even faster)

A very good example of those issues showed up in my first Gunslinger duels - the other guy did run a MAD-BH - and i was running a Summoner Prime -1 ERPPC 1 LBX and 1 LRM(5) i needed more ammo and armor.

I was not able to create enough distance, because speed difference was not important, the single ERPPC even overheat my Mech! I should have been faster more mobile and the lower number of weapons should have allowed me to fire more often - but it didn't work and the BH with its 6 MLAS and AC10 just scraped me

[Widowmaker1981]

Karl Streiger, on 04 March 2016 - 01:30 AM, said:

I was not able to create enough distance, because speed difference was not important, the single ERPPC even overheat my Mech! I should have been faster more mobile and the lower number of weapons should have allowed me to fire more often - but it didn't work and the BH with its 6 MLAS and AC10 just scraped me

You were not able to create distance with a mech 25 kph slower than you? Thats on you buddy. Don't blame the game for that.

[Karl Streiger]

Widowmaker1981, on 04 March 2016 - 02:57 AM, said:

You were not able to create distance with a mech 25 kph slower than you? Thats on you buddy. Don't blame the game for that.

Map was 1 vs 1 - there is neither enough room to run nor cover to get there - and it must have been the 300er engine for the bH so again not 25kph(7m/s) but only 2.5-3m/s difference (sry i count speed in m/s, much simpler for leading targets when you have the m/s)

Edited by Karl Streiger, 04 March 2016 - 03:01 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Karl Streiger, on 04 March 2016 - 03:01 AM, said:

Map was 1 vs 1 - there is neither enough room to run nor cover to get there - and it must have been the 300er engine for the bH so again not 25kph(7m/s) but only 2.5-3m/s difference (sry i count speed in m/s, much simpler for leading targets when you have the m/s)

300 engine in 75 ton mech = 69.7kph with tweak.

Summoner runs 93 kph with tweak.

thats nearly 25kph.

By the way, do you play very very little? Im wondering how you are still T4, since you arent new...

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 04 March 2016 - 03:05 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Karl Streiger, on 04 March 2016 - 01:30 AM, said:

• Nova Prime: 250 Engine 10 Internals 8 Externals
  
  • Grid 20 (50/5+10)
    
  • Production: 6.5 (250/100+ 8/2)
    
  • Movement -1,4
    
  • JJs 2.7 per second
    
  • 1 ER Medium Laser - Drain of 5
• Options:
  
  • don't move - fire 4 ER-M-Laser - wait 3sec - fire 4 ER-M-Laser
    
  • or move around and fire just 3 ER-M-Laser per volley (with 3-4sec per laser cooldown not very attractive)

The main issue with the Nova - its not a very attractive energy boat..not with a proper heat or energy system. To be fair i think the Nova Prime is just a hubris because somebody within fasa thought ist a good idea (its not - the Black Hawk KU has a much better configuration) - and its not a good idea to fire those 12 Lasers in current game play....





But other Nova Configs work very well: the A need ~3sec to time its shots for the ER-PPC
The Nova B - doesn't face any problems with its loadout

and there we are - the main goal is to reduce the alpha right - in weight (damage), frequence and of course the mono build.

Any more restrictive system that increase the value of less weapons but those with increased frequency may be worth looking.

About the engine (well its one of the graver mistakes of PGI to just take the engine values and keep the output the same -seriously we are talking about 34,5t for the change of 15m/s towards 18m/s for an Atlas mounting a 400STD instead of a 300. There should be a nonlinear slight increase of speed the higher the engine rating is. (Of course that means that the TimberWolf is slightly faster than the Summoner - but the Gargoyle is even faster)

A very good example of those issues showed up in my first Gunslinger duels - the other guy did run a MAD-BH - and i was running a Summoner Prime -1 ERPPC 1 LBX and 1 LRM(5) i needed more ammo and armor.

I was not able to create enough distance, because speed difference was not important, the single ERPPC even overheat my Mech! I should have been faster more mobile and the lower number of weapons should have allowed me to fire more often - but it didn't work and the BH with its 6 MLAS and AC10 just scraped me

see thats the issue, with this idea, you have already a lot more chassis of the bad ones being shafted even more. That system would cerate even more balance problems while a mech like the SCR just lols and keeps running. Also what would be the point of adding more heatsinks when this doesn't even allow Energy mechs to fire more often then? Because with your system no mech like the NVA can ever use more than 8 Energy wepaons since the frst 4 lasers cool down already before those 3 seconds have passed.
So some HBK, The Top Dog and a lot clanconfigs would be pointless. In fact binding this to engine sizes is a BAD idea. because then mechs like BNC and EXE still can keep alphavomiting energy weapons because they produce enough energy.
In fact think further, only 3 meds possible hile moving and 4 with moving? calclulate this for the light mechs who cannot stop without dying. Qnd you will see your idea basically kills the usability of the entire light category. qnd a good portion of the medium category. Especially for those OP clanlights like KFX and ADR who have rather small engine sizes comapred to the ACH or what most IS lights are allowed to carry.

If your system doesn't allow firing 4meds, then it should never allow to fire more than 1 LPL, PPC or gauss, otherwise heavies and assaults are the new meta even more than before.because their reactors under your system would allow this.

And this already shows that your system to prevent high alphas is already flawed, while it ontop of these exceptions even shafts some mechs who aren't even any sort of a Problem. It's not a solution if it adds more problems.

Edited by Lily from animove, 04 March 2016 - 08:12 AM.

[Quinton]

There is an inherent disconnect between the tabletop game and the computer game, especially where accuracy and speed of gameplay is concerned. IIRC in tabletop 1 round = 20 seconds of real time, the total amount of damage a weapon does is assumed to be over the course of those 20 seconds. For instance, medium lasers do 5 damage, to make the math easier lets assume the medium laser can be fired every 4 seconds, its per shot damage is only 1 but over the course of 1 round (20 seconds) the game assumes if you hit on your roll that you did your full effect.

Accuracy is exceptionally difficult to translate from tabletop game to computer game. Anyone can casually put a crosshair onto a target and pull the trigger. Conversely, a brand new mechwarrior in tabletop will have a much harder time even hitting his target. One possible solution would be to make the weapons affected by your mechs movement. If you go to 3rd person and watch your mech move, you will notice it bounces up and down significantly. A prime example would be the locust which bounces almost a third of its height at full run. If you go back to cockpit view, you will notice that regardless of how the mech moves the targeting reticule is always perfectly still. Adding this level of inaccuracy would allow weapon groups of any type to keep their pinpoint targeting, but would require the player to compensate for either a bouncing reticule, or assumed less accurate shots due to movement. To reference tank warfare, only in the last 20 years have fire control systems become advanced enough to counteract the bouncing of a tank to allow it to fire accurately while on the move. As an aside, I do believe that ballistic weapon groups should become more inaccurate for each weapon in the group that is fired, and for each ballistic weapon fired within 1/2-1 second of the previous ones, in order to deal with ballistic barrage spam.

If we translate damage from tabletop into the computer game, taking the round time into account, you could go one of two ways. Either have weapons with quick CD allowing them to fire multiple times every 20 seconds, but adjusting the damage so that even with perfect accuracy the total combined damage from all shots in 20 sec. would equal the weapons listed dmg. This would deal with the high alpha issue as individual alpha strikes would no longer do their devastating damage, now more alphas would be required to do the same dmg, which gives the defender more chances to dodge. The other way is to standardize all cooldowns so that they are on that 20 second round timer. This would still allow for devastating alphas, but then for the next 20 sec. the mech can't fire allowing for people using chain fire to focus damage over time to certain parts rather than going for the luck shot.

This whole thread is dangerously close to the 'chasing the meta' issue that has been a concern for this game since its first closed beta. Any changes made need to be across the board to balance everything with each other rather than focus on one issue.

Theres my 2 cents, do with them as you will.

[Karl Streiger]

Widowmaker1981, on 04 March 2016 - 03:04 AM, said:

By the way, do you play very very little? Im wondering how you are still T4, since you arent new...

I'm guilty.... i had 53 games listened for this "activity award" thin last october...so only 53 Public games since january.

Usually i have 2 public matches for 1 CW game and for 3-4 lobby games

So while i have almost two divisions (Kappa, Omicron) worth of mechs in my hangar - i rarely use them all.... some are still fresh from the manufacturer.

Lily from animove, on 04 March 2016 - 03:21 AM, said:

And this already shows that your system to prevent high alphas is already flawed, while it ontop of these exceptions even shafts some mechs who aren't even any sort of a Problem. It's not a solution if it adds more problems.

I see the problem - but it was never a "100%" idea and soulution, just wanted to point out that - the idea of an additional energy system is flawed.

And they will take the engine in account.

On the other hand - why would it be a problem when Executioner and Banshee go berserk with just energy weapons while ACH and Adder have only the ability for a single attack run?

Quinton, on 04 March 2016 - 03:32 AM, said:

This whole thread is dangerously close to the 'chasing the meta' issue that has been a concern for this game since its first closed beta. Any changes made need to be across the board to balance everything with each other rather than focus on one issue.

You are right.... MWO didn't do a good job in translating 2d6 round mechanics into real time - MW4 did a better job and even MechCommander while still random aim mechanics had also a good idea how to turn round based weapons into real time.
Given some game solutions (i-war; indircet fire) of MWLL mixed with careful planing of the key factor heat and you have a complete different game

Edited by Karl Streiger, 04 March 2016 - 03:58 AM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Karl Streiger, on 04 March 2016 - 03:54 AM, said:

I'm guilty.... i had 53 games listened for this "activity award" thin last october...so only 53 Public games since january.

Usually i have 2 public matches for 1 CW game and for 3-4 lobby games

So while i have almost two divisions (Kappa, Omicron) worth of mechs in my hangar - i rarely use them all.... some are still fresh from the manufacturer.

Ah ok.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but you are seeing a very different game in T4 public matches to the 'real' game - it looks like mechs die faster than they do when piloted by people who know the game. I started an Alt account recently, and T4 had most players simply staring everything down, no movement or torso twisting at all - i dont think i had a single game in T5/T4 with less than 800 dmg, and i was using basic mechs with no modules or unlocks.

[Karl Streiger]

Widowmaker1981, on 04 March 2016 - 04:04 AM, said:

Ah ok.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but you are seeing a very different game in T4 public matches to the 'real' game - it looks like mechs die faster than they do when piloted by people who know the game. I started an Alt account recently, and T4 had most players simply staring everything down, no movement or torso twisting at all - i dont think i had a single game in T5/T4 with less than 800 dmg, and i was using basic mechs with no modules or unlocks.

Oh i don't take those games into account, group queue is a different story
I see a variation of mechs that i haven't seen since closed or even open beta, oh and i see complete new tactics - like camping at lower levels - or just going for the upper level when its not an advantage

i really would like to have ELO back


Anyhow 90% of my "balance" ideas are based on math, i only care about meta to understand how and why it works
for example one of the fixed balance equotation was 3 Large Laser vs 2 PPCs.
I could use is perfectly in 2013 and i stil lcan use it now - only the meta have changed but this equotation still shows the current challenges.
Given each weapon and compare it with a different one, MWO isn't that bad. but compare a cluster of weapons with another number of weapons or even consider tonnage of those arrays and things go sideways.

The alpha issue isn't that bad if not for the effective boating of smaller weapon systems - (for example 4 medium laser should not be twice as good as the large laser at ranges above 90m - and even below the concentrated damage of the large laser should outgun an array of medium lasers.

- there are several ways to achieve that - even with the current bandaids:

• decrease the effective range and multiple the max range
  
  • 90m (540m) vs 150m (900m), or better a add a nonlinear factor
    
  • 52m (468m) vs 61m(929m)
• let ghost heat always kick in when firing the second weapon in 0.5sec
  
• reduce the beam duration for bigger lasers, increase speed for bigger ACs
  
• decrease the damage for smaller weapons and increase the RoF (like ACs work)

Edited by Karl Streiger, 04 March 2016 - 05:29 AM.