11 replies to this topic

[JernauM]

There seems to be a clear intent with recent PTS changes to force some kind of information warfare into the game, as evidenced by the proposed lock-for-range and lock-for-hit-reg-flash mechanics on PTS.

What's not clear to me is who is asking for this kind of information warfare and why?

Are there many players looking for a chance to run around the map and ... hold locks? It doesn't sound that fun to me personally and I'm curious to hear what others think.

Let's not confuse these proposed info-tech mechanics with laser nerfs. Laser can be straightforwardly nerfed by adjusting the base value for laser range, damage, heat, and duration. We don't need new mechanics for that.

[Khobai]

Quote

What's not clear to me is who is asking for this kind of information warfare and why?

players have continually asked for light mechs to have a stronger scouting role in the game

but I dont think anyone wanted or expected the abortion on the PTR...

[Benjamin Davion]

My honest opinion? PGI has had a massive throbbing hard on for LRMs for a long time. It became abundantly obvious when they decided speeding LRMs and additional 50% was a good idea. (Anyone remember how hard the freak out was over that and how quickly, and peevishly, they scaled that back?) Since then, they've nerfed PPCs, autocannons, and now they're nerfing lasers, nerfing gauss, and buffing LRMs (again) by reducing their spread. At the same time, they're trying to forcibly increase the amount of locks on the field.

Short version, PGI is doing everything possible to buff the least skill-dependent weapon system in the game. The Lazy Ranged Missile. All hail the scrub lords.

[sycocys]

A lot of us have been hounding them for information warfare and more defined roles since closed beta. 100% perfect way of doing it? No, but it is 100% better than what is on live.

[JernauM]

sycocys, on 05 November 2015 - 03:39 AM, said:

A lot of us have been hounding them for information warfare and more defined roles since closed beta. 100% perfect way of doing it? No, but it is 100% better than what is on live.

What kind of information warfare would you ideally like to have in the game?

I don't think we should be forced to choose between lock-for-range or nothing at all, especially if there are better alternatives we can suggest.

[Karl Streiger]

JernauM, on 05 November 2015 - 04:06 AM, said:

What kind of information warfare would you ideally like to have in the game?

I don't think we should be forced to choose between lock-for-range or nothing at all, especially if there are better alternatives we can suggest.

OK a hell lot "conditions" that are not existing yet

• Consider the reduced visibility smoke dust what ever will be increased
  
  • locking a target will paint a "silhouette"
    
    • you don't shoot doritos
      
    • you shoot "phantom" mechs but you can aim even when you don't see them
• Consider zoom is only available when your target is locked
  
  • explain:
    
  • A mech has a target & tracking system - that aim weapons
    
  • you the pilot should only be able to choose targets
    
  • in MWO "YOU" are the TT system - you aim you fire - so zooming increases aim = Targeting & Tracking
• ranges for weapons are increased
  
  • Paul mentioned long range - so say no lock = effective range is medium range
    
  • not because it makes any sense but because you are the T&T system
    
  • the max range anyhow is trippled
    
  • example
    
    • PPC - now 540 - 1080; then 360-1080 (without lock)
      
    • PPC - now 540 -1080; then 540-1620 (with lock)

So you see information warfare is more but "see" where the target is - (scouting on maps with good visibility is senseless) but above ideas would even change this

[JernauM]

Are you saying that you want to jump in a scout mech and hold locks as your primary role on the battlefield?

How interested would you be in piloting a mech that had the capability to hold 2 or 3 locks simultaneously but had little to no firepower otherwise?

[Cold Darkness]

JernauM, on 05 November 2015 - 04:59 AM, said:

Are you saying that you want to jump in a scout mech and hold locks as your primary role on the battlefield?

How interested would you be in piloting a mech that had the capability to hold 2 or 3 locks simultaneously but had little to no firepower otherwise?

id guess that would be hard to do engine wise.
to have that option would be amazing, though. AS LONG AS YOU CAN SPECIFICALLY PICK WHICH 3 TO LOCK ON TO.

[Karl Streiger]

JernauM, on 05 November 2015 - 04:59 AM, said:

Are you saying that you want to jump in a scout mech and hold locks as your primary role on the battlefield?

How interested would you be in piloting a mech that had the capability to hold 2 or 3 locks simultaneously but had little to no firepower otherwise?

Well I'm not a good scout admit. But I did run the "base" training with some guys. (before ECM)
And it doesn't sound thrilling at first but those fights were extreme challenging. To sneak into the rear quarters of the enemy . you sometimes even saw those guys but they didn't saw you. And after you slipped behind the lines you uses TAG to call the rain (in this cases - perfect placed Gauss or PPC shots)

and if the system would work in this (above) case - you will become primary target for the "enemy" brawlers that want to close the distance but can't as long as its raining nickel iron and charged ions

[SpiralFace]

Why?

Because people who originally founded an supported the game since it was announced have been waiting for the dev's to deliver on it since it was outlined as a CORE design pillar of the game.

People have been waiting literally since this game was announced for info tech to have an actual meaning in the game.

Quote

Are you saying that you want to jump in a scout mech and hold locks as your primary role on the battlefield?
How interested would you be in piloting a mech that had the capability to hold 2 or 3 locks simultaneously but had little to no firepower otherwise?

Having this at least as an option is at least better then the mechs just being completely dead weight in the game. Locusts, spiders, commandos, blackjacks, and MANY other mechs are completely useless in this game as it currently stands, and no amount of offensive quirks on live have changed that. These mechs exist in this game and at least need SOME kind of reason to physically exist in this game, otherwise it is literally pointless to have them.

Not to mention that Mechwarrior for the longest time has been plagued with the "arms race" mentality that "heavy and assaults are just better at everything." Heaven forbid they actually try and balance the scales a bit to give mediums and lights a physical purpose within the game.

Not to mention that many people are just flat out sick of this game coming down to only a certain amount of mechs being "viable" picks because everything is ONLY judged on a firepower scale.

[JernauM]

SpiralFace, on 05 November 2015 - 06:01 AM, said:

Having this at least as an option is at least better then the mechs just being completely dead weight in the game. Locusts, spiders, commandos, blackjacks, and MANY other mechs are completely useless in this game as it currently stands, and no amount of offensive quirks on live have changed that.

I don't think that's completely correct. For example, offensive quirks have made the BJ-1X into a serious threat at medium range.

But let's take your argument at face value that info-tech is needed to make certain mechs useful. What kind of info-tech experience do you personally want to have while piloting, for example, a Spider or Commando, and why do you think that type of gameplay would be fun for you?

Edited by JernauM, 06 November 2015 - 01:55 AM.

[Nik Reaper]

JernauM, on 06 November 2015 - 01:36 AM, said:

I don't think that's completely correct. For example, offensive quirks have made the BJ-1X into a serious threat at medium range.

But let's take your argument at face value that info-tech is needed to make certain mechs useful. What kind of info-tech experience do you personally want to have while piloting, for example, a Spider or Commando, and why do you think that type of gameplay would be fun for you?

That is a though question , how about this , this idea is way overpowered I know but this is the direction my thoughts go if I am to like and be useful using a small mech that can not do DPS:

So something like a shorter range less duration UAV with a cooldown like an ability or a set number of them ( like ~5 ) that are just there , no extra weight or module slot and best of all , no cbillz X) ) , and something like a damage amplifier so that when said mech targets an enemy all friendly mechs do increased damage to it, like 5% that doesn't stack with other scouts, and deceases the damage falloff when shooting over optimal range by something, all numbers are open to change. Also now that you mention it , I would like to be able to lock multiple targets at the same time, so let's add that too .

Something like this I would think could make at least one designated scout mech ( that only has a few medium lasers, a large laser or a few srms but can not brawl like the firestarter/cheetah and can't snipe like the raven ) make it to some comp decks or just make you feel kinda glad it's in the pug match and it will do something useful.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 06 November 2015 - 02:58 AM.