85 replies to this topic

[DAYLEET]

Im Type B.

I also realised lore does not work for balance purpose. more about lore down the post.

I do want a slower ttk

Lugh, on 11 November 2015 - 11:43 AM, said:

The type Bs also are more likely to have never played a Strategy game in their lives.

I HIGHLY doubt that. Go ask in SupCom forum or Civ forum how many have played a Battletech game in the past other than pg games like MW2.

Darian DelFord, on 11 November 2015 - 11:58 AM, said:

Hell I rememebr leaving Crescent Hawk's Inception on all night just to run up my C-Bills in the Comstar. Invest 100 Cbills wake up the next morning and it would be over 10 million.

I did that with SimCity 2000.

Madcap72, on 11 November 2015 - 12:06 PM, said:

The other common breakdown it seems are people that think only THEY are true believers in MW/ BT and NO ONE ELSE can possibly know as much as they do, or like the game as much as they do and anyone that disagrees with them is WRONG, and clearly not on their level.

Because they like the books and want something similar withjout realising you can't have that. Unless it's solo where it's created to make you win and inflate your ego. In a fps you're not a hero and you can't hope for plot twist to save your ass, the other 12 guys in front of you really want you dead.

pwnface, on 11 November 2015 - 12:19 PM, said:

How long is average TTK in this game for a 1v1? 30 seconds? 1 minute? TTK in this game isn't that bad at all, people just think they should be able to stand in the open and tank an enemy firing line.

It's not actually the ttk that gets to me, it's how everything is so fast. Very very old vids of this game would explain well what i mean. Slower moving mech, they had a weight and a presence that we don;t have now, and ofcourse the powercreep that got in with the clan.

sycocys, on 11 November 2015 - 12:19 PM, said:

There is also very little if anything to actually "do" in the game other than shoot other mechs. - Lore/Prior games would actually be a good place to dive into here.

I don't even begin to understand why we buy mech without being able to read the history of those mech. I have the same problem with Elite Dangerous, you buy a ship and all you see is the stats. Read the manual of the very first ED and they describe the ships interior and i swear you want to live in and own that ship, there is little ownership or immersion in ED just like MWO and it would be so easy and basic to implement.

Edited by DAYLEET, 11 November 2015 - 01:10 PM.

[Darian DelFord]

If it does not involve the thumbs kids now a days have no idea what to do with it. (Taken Many Ways as Intended)

[Dread Render]

I guess considering how divided we all seem to be about tis game that PGI is not doing to bad.

hell, I purchase the Marauder Pack & the Hero
Cant wait to get it.
That Green Marauder just looks so damn cool.

[Rizzelbizzeg]

sigh just another us vs them post. Everything black and white bla bla bla.

What if I dgaf about BT lore but want longer, drawn-out battles befitting a big ol gundam? Noooo I must be one of those COD kiddies #360noscope #420blazeit

I'll posit that it's only the BT guys who can't figure out the quote button

[CDLord HHGD]

Render, on 11 November 2015 - 12:46 PM, said:

I guess considering how divided we all seem to be about tis game that PGI is not doing to bad.

hell, I purchase the Marauder Pack & the Hero
Cant wait to get it.
That Green Marauder just looks so damn cool.

I'm still here and as you can see from my Founder's badge, I've been here a loooooooooong time. I am sure many people quietly curse me at night but I also have my friends or at least sympathetic supporters. I always fight for lore and lore driven balance and I always will. My proposals always have a basis in lore and not a small part of me does not like that this game has devolved into a FPS twitch shooter, but that's also kinda what I expected.

IMHO MWO will see a lot of player migration out when that new BT games comes out (I haven't decided yet, giving PGI time). What I want, what many lore driven people want, is Star Citizen in the Battletech Universe. MWO is good for what it is and I am still sending them money, but it's faaaaaaaaaar short of the dream of a Battletech game. Doesn't mean I'll quit trying though.

[Darian DelFord]

Render, on 11 November 2015 - 12:46 PM, said:

I guess considering how divided we all seem to be about tis game that PGI is not doing to bad.

hell, I purchase the Marauder Pack & the Hero
Cant wait to get it.
That Green Marauder just looks so damn cool.

LOL.... Were you a founder and or around when they made their grand promises. Like Community Warfare in 90 days. 3 years later we have this PoS

[Lugh]

DAYLEET, on 11 November 2015 - 12:42 PM, said:

Im Type B.

I also realised lore does not work.

I do want a slower ttk



I HIGHLY doubt that. Go ask in SupCom forum or Civ forum how many have played a Battletech game in the past other than pg games like MW2.



I did that with SimCity 2000.



Because they like the books and want something similar withjout realising you can't have that. Unless it's solo where it's created to make you win and inflate your ego. In a fps you're not a hero and you can't hope for plot twist to save your ass, the other 12 guys in front of you really want you dead.



It's not actually the ttk that gets to me, it's how everything is so fast. Very very old vids of this game would explain well what i mean. Slower moving mech, they had a weight and a presence that we don;t have now, and ofcourse the powercreep that got in with the clan.

Dude if Lore didn't work you wouldn't have a game today. It's that they IGNORED the lore and didn't do any of the correct MATH to take 10 second turns and turn it in to real time.

If the LORE says 5 damage over 10 seconds and you give the weapon 5 damage and a recharge rate of 3seconds, you get 3.x Times the damage in the same period of time. And then you go and only double the armor and internal structure you end up with the travesty of MWO today.

1) Gamers don't like fractional numbers so take all table top values and multiply by 1000. Now assign the refresh rate of the weapon you want once every 3 seconds for the ML. It now Fires a beam that does 1667 damage every 3 seconds.

The armor then also needs to be increased by the amounts so multiply by 1000 and a 40point torso now has 40000 points of armor.
Time to kill goes through the roof. Damage numbers become big OMG DID YOU SEE THAT DAMAGE I did?!?! and you have two parties that are relatively happy.

2) Restore HEAT NEUTRALITY as a possibility to mechs firing weapons and make true dubs, true dubs. Lower the heat cap. Institute a heat scale with ACTUAL PENALTIES, like 60% heat you start to twist slower and so on....

BAM Simulation achieved. Relative Balance achieved.

[DAYLEET]

Lugh, on 11 November 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

BAM Simulation achieved. Relative Balance achieved.

Damage is only one part of CoreRules(not lore). I keep reading that TT wasnt balanced in the slightest. But you don't want balance, you want lore.

[Void Angel]

Render, on 11 November 2015 - 11:37 AM, said:

This game has 2 types of players.
Type A : Founders and Fans of BattleTech / MechWarrior.
Type B : Everyone else.

A : Let’s keep this a BattleTech / MechWarrior game with all the trimmings and avoid the FPS trap.
B : this is an FPS, I don’t care about lore, just give me action in a big robot.

A : I want more immersion and a slower TTK.
B : The TTK is to slow, I want more explosions and les thought.

. . . we really have a problem here.
We are a house divided. It is hard for a type B person to imagine what the heck type A people are thinking because they never played a MW game before and it is hard for a type A person to know what a type B person is thinking because they wanted a MW game from day one.

Sorry, I’m not sure where to go from here as I’m at work but the dev’s have a tight rope to walk and if they let it get to loose someone may end up hanging from it.

btw, I have played every PC MW game since MW1

Er, no. I'm one sourcebook away from being able to host an full-scale planetary invasion (I never could find a copy of BattleSpace when I had the cash,) from JumpShip insertion to last 'mech standing - in double-blind format. And I love the stories and fiction about the game universe - but the lore is flavor; it's not a suicide pact. I understand that I'm not playing a computerized version of the board game, and I understand that I'm not playing the overpowered, broken Clan 'mechs of yore - and what's more, I approve. I approve because I want a game that's playable and fun more than I want a LARP accessory.

The point of this is that your idea, that there are "Real BattleTech Fans" and "Other People," is pretentious nonsense, and I exemplify why. It's a lie you've told yourself to rationalize why your viewpoint about the game is marginalized. You don't feel that your opinion is being given the high respect that of course you are due as a True BattleTech Fan, so it must be all the plebians who are drowning out the good opinions of all the best people. The stupid, mindless plebians, who just want "more explosions and les[sic] thought."

Your arrogance is offensive, or course - but your ignorance is also inexcusable. One of the major complaints that your "les thought" plebians evince about the game is that they get killed too quickly! It's all tied up in the learning curve of the game, but it's right there if you take off your rose colored glasses and climb down off your horse. PGI is looking to reduce time to kill as well, so your put-on front of victimization on that count doesn't hold water either. This is current, much-discussed information which you simply ignore.

So to sum it all up, your tragic song of horror and woe is a load of road apples. There's not a class divide in the player base that threatens the success of the game. There's certainly not a load of ignorant peasants whose irrational, low-brow wants are ruining the Wonderful Game that Would Have Been - if only the Right People had been exclusively consulted. The game we have is imperfect - there are a lot of flaws, many traceable to IGP - but it's improving and looking much more polished and complete every month. The changes PGI is testing are directly applicable to the too-low time to kill you blame on The Masses, making that a shared concern even if we accept your artificial division of the player base.

Frankly, this is all tired, silly nonsense that has been trotted out since open beta in some kind of childish attempt to browbeat PGI and comfort the minority that holds this viewpoint with a false moral superiority. If you can't tell, I for one am tired of it.

Edited by Void Angel, 11 November 2015 - 01:29 PM.

[Void Angel]

Darian DelFord, on 11 November 2015 - 11:58 AM, said:

Hell I rememebr leaving Crescent Hawk's Inception on all night just to run up my C-Bills in the Comstar. Invest 100 Cbills wake up the next morning and it would be over 10 million.

You could also get c-bills by pinning down a movement key and running up against a wall. The game measured time in player movements, so your allowance would just pile up and up.

Lugh, on 11 November 2015 - 01:13 PM, said:

Dude if Lore didn't work you wouldn't have a game today.

Can you explain to me the point of an AC/10 in Classic Battletech?

[CDLord HHGD]

DAYLEET, on 11 November 2015 - 01:24 PM, said:

Damage is only one part of CoreRules(not lore). I keep reading that TT wasnt balanced in the slightest. But you don't want balance, you want lore.

"Relative" balance. If that means a lore-based imbalance, then so be it.

[Dread Render]

Void Angel, on 11 November 2015 - 01:25 PM, said:

Er, no. I'm one sourcebook away from being able to host an full-scale planetary invasion (I never could find a copy of BattleSpace when I had the cash,) from JumpShip insertion to last 'mech standing - in double-blind format. And I love the stories and fiction about the game universe - but the lore is flavor; it's not a suicide pact. I understand that I'm not playing a
... Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla Bla

All I said was there are generally two types of people who play this game and that is correct, generaly speaking.
Everything else you said is ALL ON YOU... You think all that Not me, You Do not speak for me, You do not know me.
What you are is a Narcissist! and I'm glad to read your bitternes and anger... thats what you deserve.
YOU MADE That Bed, Not me... May You Stay and Rythe in it forever ;-)

[Void Angel]

No, you said everything I criticized you for saying, and you said it in the post I quoted. Here: let me hammer you with your own words some more.

[FupDup]

The upcoming HBS Battletech game actually provides a pretty elegant solution to this. It's clear from the news posts that are up that the HBS game will be, to inject my own bias into it, a "grognard playground." This is where people can let their neck-length beards hang wild and free, and roleplay harder than people who do civil war reenactments.


This means that MWO could, in theory, finally make a few deviations. Before you say "But everything wrong with the game is because of deviations!" that isn't true. There are a few issues because of that, like LRMs and Streaks being the best example of things that MWO screwed up but were okay in BT, but there are also several problems CAUSED by BT.

For example, in most cases the heavier mech is going to be the better mech in MWO, unless there are large disparities in things like tech level, hitboxes, or hardpoints. This was caused by BT's "bigger is better" construction system. In BT, you used a lower-weight mech when you didn't have the money to afford the heavier-weight mech. But when you did have the money, it was better to go bigger. MWO does reduce the severity of this effect, but it's still present.

The average Clan mech being much better than the average IS mech is also caused by BT. People are going to say "But Clans are supposed to be better!" Yeah, it's technically canon, but it's poorly designed canon that sucks in gameplay.

Weapons like the AC/2 and IS Small Laser are crap because they were crap in BT and haven't been compensated enough in this game. Weapons like Gauss and the Clan ERML were epicsauce in BT, and lo-and-behold they are also that way in MWO.

Etc.

Preemptive counterargument: Somebody in this thread is going to tell me to play Hawken or some other "generic robot game." My response ahead of time to that is that Mechwarrior has several unique aspects like multiple hitboxes, more weapon and equipment variety, torso twisting (no strafing), lots of construction and customization options, and an industrial/bulky art style instead of skinny anime mecha samurai, to name the first ones that come into my head.

If you find me a "generic" mech game with those qualities, then I might consider your offer and leave. But until then, I'm stuck in here with you.

Edited by FupDup, 11 November 2015 - 01:45 PM.

[Void Angel]

Render, on 11 November 2015 - 11:37 AM, said:

This game has 2 types of players.
Type A : Founders and Fans of BattleTech / MechWarrior.
Type B : Everyone else.

A : Let’s keep this a BattleTech / MechWarrior game with all the trimmings and avoid the FPS trap.
B : this is an FPS, I don’t care about lore, just give me action in a big robot.

A : I want more immersion and a slower TTK.
B : The TTK is to slow, I want more explosions and les thought.

. . . we really have a problem here.
We are a house divided. It is hard for a type B person to imagine what the heck type A people are thinking because they never played a MW game before and it is hard for a type A person to know what a type B person is thinking because they wanted a MW game from day one.

Sorry, I’m not sure where to go from here as I’m at work but the dev’s have a tight rope to walk and if they let it get to loose someone may end up hanging from it.

btw, I have played every PC MW game since MW1

[pwnface]

It's been said before but I'll say it again. Sticking with tabletop values for a computer game where players can actually aim WILL NOT WORK. Unless we are going to implement dice rolls every time a player fires a weapon, tabletop rules don't belong in this game. Even tabletop rules were not well balanced and required a BV system that we'll never have in MWO. 10v12 is never happening guys, get over it.

[Lugh]

FupDup, on 11 November 2015 - 01:43 PM, said:

The upcoming HBS Battletech game actually provides a pretty elegant solution to this. It's clear from the news posts that are up that the HBS game will be, to inject my own bias into it, a "grognard playground." This is where people can let their neck-length beards hang wild and free, and roleplay harder than people who do civil war reenactments.


This means that MWO could, in theory, finally make a few deviations. Before you say "But everything wrong with the game is because of deviations!" that isn't true. There are a few issues because of that, like LRMs and Streaks being the best example of things that MWO screwed up but were okay in BT, but there are also several problems CAUSED by BT.

For example, in most cases the heavier mech is going to be the better mech in MWO, unless there are large disparities in things like tech level, hitboxes, or hardpoints. This was caused by BT's "bigger is better" construction system. In BT, you used a lower-weight mech when you didn't have the money to afford the heavier-weight mech. But when you did have the money, it was better to go bigger. MWO does reduce the severity of this effect, but it's still present.

The average Clan mech being much better than the average IS mech is also caused by BT. People are going to say "But Clans are supposed to be better!" Yeah, it's technically canon, but it's poorly designed canon that sucks in gameplay.

Weapons like the AC/2 and IS Small Laser are crap because they were crap in BT and haven't been compensated enough in this game. Weapons like Gauss and the Clan ERML were epicsauce in BT, and lo-and-behold they are also that way in MWO.

Etc.

Preemptive counterargument: Somebody in this thread is going to tell me to play Hawken or some other "generic robot game." My response ahead of time to that is that Mechwarrior has several unique aspects like multiple hitboxes, more weapon and equipment variety, torso twisting (no strafing), lots of construction and customization options, and an industrial/bulky art style instead of skinny anime mecha samurai, to name the first ones that come into my head.

If you find me a "generic" mech game with those qualities, then I might consider your offer and leave. But until then, I'm stuck in here with you.

Yeah sure that's why the 3 faction system in Dark age of camelot with each faction having very distinct and very OP methods of playing failed so utterly right?

Nope. That system THRIVED on imbalance and using Zerg vs Small elite forces to fault.

You COULD do the same thing in MWO. HOWEVER, since PGI is so farking bad at Math, they can't figure out how to take a 24 mech maximum and keep solo que mixed.

If every clan mech is 1.6x better than every IS mech ..do the math. Let the team size be variable. Set a marker in the Queue for Clan / IS metrics.

There is a way to do that. They just don't want to bother. They COULD also FAST FORWARD and Bam tech is equal as everyone has Clan based tech on all their mechs.

essentially it works out to if one side is ALL clan you get 8 v 12 to be = in firepower

the part that breaks brains is where you then mix up the number of people n both teams. But since this is Company level engagements you COULD set the MAX clan mechs on a side to 5 (full star) which is offset to 8 IS mechs on the other side or a full star on the other side.

It would be a lot easier if the queues had more structure.

Edited by Lugh, 11 November 2015 - 02:05 PM.

[pwnface]

Lugh, on 11 November 2015 - 01:58 PM, said:

Yeah sure that's why the 3 faction system in Dark age of camelot with each faction having very distinct and very OP methods of playing failed so utterly right?

Nope. That system THRIVED on imbalance and using Zerg vs Small elite forces to fault.

You COULD do the same thing in MWO. HOWEVER, since PGI is so farking bad at Math, they can't figure out how to take a 24 mech maximum and keep solo que mixed.

If every clan mech is 1.6x better than every IS mech ..do the math. Let the team size be variable. Set a marker in the Queue for Clan / IS metrics.

There is a way to do that. They just don't want to bother. They COULD also FAST FORWARD and Bam tech is equal as everyone has Clan based tech on all their mechs.

10 v 12 is never going to happen, get over it.

I'm glad that you aren't the one designing this game because it wouldn't be around very long with the ideas that you have.

[Mudhutwarrior]

I don't buy into the two types mode. That is way over generalizing. Just consider the differnt personalities in your own life.

That kind of black and white/ on or off does nothing to help the issues in the end. It just makes wider gulfs in division.

[Bud Crue]

To all those who say the game needs to be more like any other FPS, can you provide some sort of narrative or reason why someone unfamiliar with Mechwarrior or Battletech would want to play this game?

If indeed the goal is to balance the game play to the point where clans and IS are equal, and all mechs are equal in game value regardless of weight, I just don't see the point of playing more than maybe three or four mechs (and even that assumes that the classes retain some distinction of play style). It seems intuitively obvious to me that if we go this route the presumed casual player (Steam) will certainly not invest any significant $ in the game (Why would they? We want all mechs to have the same game play value right so why buy variety?).

Moreover if we go further and eliminate in game advancement/leveling (see proposed nerfed skill tree) the new player has even less incentive to invest (buy 3 mechs for the potential to gain a 5% increase in performance...um no).

These changes may make a better "balanced" FPS, but they sure don't sound like much fun for a game where you build and fight customized stompy robots. Nor do I see how they set MWO apart from other FPS other than by having robot skins. Yet, these are the proposals currently on the table and seemingly likely to be implemented (see Paul's comments regarding balance, see the current test server dequirking, skill nerfing) and which seemingly are mostly being lauded by the FPS crowd.

I just don't see how such a balanced approach keeps MWO alive over the long term and attracts new $ paying players to the game to help it do so.