45 replies to this topic

[Marcel Bekker]

Yeonne Greene, on 24 January 2016 - 10:17 AM, said:

Counter-point:

Those TT values make Large Lasers pointless in one fell swoop, too.

That is... debatable. But right now, I am in no mood for a debate, and you did not provide any arguments to support your statement either.

Anyway, I just posted this to show the discrepancy... which is not there for PPCs or basicly any other weapon but the lasers. No, for the most part they have their TT damage and heat values(some oversights on my part are of course possible). Hell, despite having doubled armor values, most ammo based weapons do not even have a 50% increase of their TT ammo values per ton, much less doubled. The SRMs in particular have exactly their TT values for ammo, the largest increase is for the AC10 which is the only weapon in the game that actually has double the ammo per ton compared to TT.

*shrug*
I would really like to know what the people in charge of balancing all this were thinking, or if they had a plan at all... it looks like a series of bandaids to me.

Edited by Marcel Bekker, 24 January 2016 - 10:24 AM.

[FupDup]

Yeonne Greene, on 24 January 2016 - 10:17 AM, said:

Counter-point:

Those TT values make Large Lasers pointless in one fell swoop, too.

Small Pulse Lasers of both factions become utterly useless as well.

[Y E O N N E]

Marcel Bekker, on 24 January 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

That is... debatable. But right now, I am in no mood for a debate, and you did not provide any arguments to support your statement either.

Why should I take an ERLL that does 8 damage in 12 heat for a small advantage in range when I can take a PPC that does 10 damage in 10 heat? And if I need the range, why wouldn't I just take Gauss or ER PPCs? C-ERPPC? And how about Clan ER Mediums? Way more efficient than IS Large Lasers.

Translate that into MWO now, with things like burn-time and rate of fire added in. ERLL becomes complete garbage, and the LL isn't exactly flourishing, either, both being way too hot for the output they provide and the resources they consume. PPCs and Medium Lasers will dominate. Gauss will dominate.


Remember the time before quirks? Before Clans? Yeah, Large-class lasers of any type were not common even with their buffs over TT. A few using ERLL, but would get utterly destroyed by the PPC+Gauss/AC combos or boated ML with a fast engine.

[Marcel Bekker]

Yeonne Greene, on 24 January 2016 - 10:29 AM, said:

Why should I take an ERLL that does 8 damage in 12 heat for a small advantage in range when I can take a PPC that does 10 damage in 10 heat? And if I need the range, why wouldn't I just take Gauss or ER PPCs? C-ERPPC? And how about Clan ER Mediums? Way more efficient than IS Large Lasers.

Translate that into MWO now, with things like burn-time and rate of fire added in. ERLL becomes complete garbage, and the LL isn't exactly flourishing, either, both being way too hot for the output they provide and the resources they consume. PPCs and Medium Lasers will dominate. Gauss will dominate.


Remember the time before quirks? Before Clans? Yeah, Large-class lasers of any type were not common even with their buffs over TT. A few using ERLL, but would get utterly destroyed by the PPC+Gauss/AC combos or boated ML with a fast engine.

Why not take non-hitscan weapons? Well, because they are not hitscan, of course. It is obvious that these TT values would not work with the current burntime durations on lasers. And then there is the fact that we do not even have actual double heatsinks, unless they come with the engine.

Once again though, I never argued that these values be implemented. At least not without actual double heatsinks, and a complete overhaul of the laser durations.

Marcel Bekker, on 24 January 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

Anyway, I just posted this to show the discrepancy... which is not there for PPCs or basicly any other weapon but the lasers. No, for the most part they have their TT damage and heat values(some oversights on my part are of course possible). Hell, despite having doubled armor values, most ammo based weapons do not even have a 50% increase of their TT ammo values per ton, much less doubled. The SRMs in particular have exactly their TT values for ammo, the largest increase is for the AC10 which is the only weapon in the game that actually has double the ammo per ton compared to TT.

This is the point I was trying to make.

PS: Please excuse the constant editing, I have a headache at the moment and trouble concentrating because of it.

Edited by Marcel Bekker, 24 January 2016 - 10:40 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Marcel Bekker, on 24 January 2016 - 10:34 AM, said:

This is the point I was trying to make.

Which you edited in seven minutes after I posted. Still, to what end are you making that point, though? That's a supporting detail, not a statement of position. That's where I'm not clear. Are you trying to say that it would be better balanced if it stuck closer to TT with lasers? Are you saying that it would be better balanced if they didn't stick so close to TT with every thing else? Something in between? What?

I jump to the conclusion I did because when most people start pointing out the disparities around here, it's because they think the TT game had good balance and can work translated to MWO.

[LordNothing]

i could see windowing being used especially on long range lasers. lasers would only do optimal damage at their optimal range. damage might be non linear too, gradual falloff close to the optimal range, more rapid falloff closer to the extremes. breaking it down:

size....start damage...max range multiplier
small..100%...............1.75x
med...50%.................1.5x
large..25%.................1.25x

this would mean you would see more mixed laser builds as one size no longer fits all. long range weapons would become grossly inefficient at close range. and mediums are no longer the work horses that they were. you still have an issue with the boating of smaller lasers but thats not a problem on the is side, on the clan side small lasers are really good. damage wise they are equivalent to is mediums with less heat. maybe take it from 3 up to 3.5. range is a little better, and more than justifies the heat nerf. this would keep backstabbers in check and would help balance out lights a little better (cheeto vs firestarter would be on equal footing i think).

Edited by LordNothing, 24 January 2016 - 10:56 AM.

[Marcel Bekker]

Yeonne Greene, on 24 January 2016 - 10:42 AM, said:

Which you edited in seven minutes after I posted. Still, to what end are you making that point, though? That's a supporting detail, not a statement of position. That's where I'm not clear. Are you trying to say that it would be better balanced if it stuck closer to TT with lasers? Are you saying that it would be better balanced if they didn't stick so close to TT with every thing else? Something in between? What?

I jump to the conclusion I did because when most people start pointing out the disparities around here, it's because they think the TT game had good balance and can work translated to MWO.

I edited it in before the your post appeared on my screen... but that is inconsequential, I do not want to assign blame or anything.

Trouble concentrating from a headache, combined with general trouble of focusing on specific train of thoughts without getting sidetracked leads me to rely on editing my posts overly much. Or just to correct typos, and then I notice another thing I could have mentioned... I apologize for this, but I can not change it.

The point I was trying to make is, that the balance in MWO is a mess because the people in charge of it seem to have no general plan as to how all of this should work. We see one weapon or combination of weapons dominating, a bandaid is applied that in the end fixes nothing but breaks even more. And this continues on and on and on.
With the added point that ammo based weapons are penalized by their low ammo capacity per ton, caused by the doubled armor values we have in MWO

It would be better to wipe the slate clean, default the stats that can be defaulted back to TT values, and start balancing around these values by adjusting values that are specific to MWO... cycle times, projectile speeds, laser duration.

But I fear that by now we are way too deep inside this bandaid mess to be able to do just that. Not without breaking the game completely for quite some time.

Edited by Marcel Bekker, 24 January 2016 - 10:57 AM.

[Marcel Bekker]

FupDup, on 24 January 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

Small Pulse Lasers of both factions become utterly useless as well.

SRM2, 2 tons with 1 ton of ammo, combined 2 tons: 4 damage and 2 heat every 2 seconds
2x SPL(MWO), 2 ton: 8 damage and 4 heat every 2.25 seconds
2x SPL(TT), 2 ton: 6 damage and 4 heat every X seconds

X as a variable since TT has no recycle times.

Looks balanced to me, even with the current cycle MWO time. Remember, SPLs are a short duration hitscan weapon, SRMs need to be lead and still spread damage.

Imho, far from useless. Just not the definitive fast brawler weapon that it is now, especially for the Clan version.

Edited by Marcel Bekker, 24 January 2016 - 11:08 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Marcel Bekker, on 24 January 2016 - 10:54 AM, said:

I edited it in before the your post appeared on my screen... but that is inconsequential, I do not want to assign blame or anything.

Trouble concentrating from a headache, combined with general trouble of focusing on specific train of thoughts without getting sidetracked leads me to rely on editing my posts overly much. Or just to correct typos, and then I notice another thing I could have mentioned... I apologize for this, but I can not change it.
[

Edits are fine, I just don't want to be accused of not reading it when I couldn't have possibly read it before. I make edits all the time.

Quote

The point I was trying to make is, that the balance in MWO is a mess because the people in charge of it seem to have no general plan as to how all of this should work. We see one weapon or combination of weapons dominating, a bandaid is applied that in the end fixes nothing but breaks even more. And this continues on and on and on.
With the added point that ammo based weapons are penalized by their low ammo capacity per ton, caused by the doubled armor values we have in MWO

No disagreement there, I think many of us see the same thing.

Quote

It would be better to wipe the slate clean, default the stats that can be defaulted back to TT values, and start balancing around these values by adjusting values that are specific to MWO... cycle times, projectile speeds, laser duration.

This is where I disagree. We can keep the tonnage and slots and then add performance metrics to make weapons worth their investments, but the rest was arguably never balanced to begin with. TT operated on a Battle Value system combined with C-bill economics and, sometimes, special effects to make the use of inferior, cheaper equipment viable. It also worked with a random hit generator and deleterious effects for things like accuracy. We don't have that here. In MWO, every 'Mech implicitly has the same Battle Value because it's 12 v. 12 no matter what, even if there's 12 lights vs. 12 heavies and all of those lights only have flamers while all of those heavies have Gauss and C-LPL.

It is, simply, too different to use as the framework for MWO. Not even MW:LL used the TT values. Certain TT rules and the lore should only serve as guidelines to inform your new, purpose-built rules and maintain the spirit of the stories. A MechWarrior shooter cannot and should not ever be a reinterpretation of the Table Top game.

Quote

But I fear that by now we are way too deep inside this bandaid mess to be able to do just that. Not without breaking the game completely for quite some time.

It wouldn't be broken for a long time if PGI would commit themselves to rapid-release balance fixing session over a few months. And they can't do it on PTS, because not enough people play PTS. They could turn off stat-tracking in the main server for awhile so nobody gets mad at tanking due to equipment being in flux.

[FupDup]

Marcel Bekker, on 24 January 2016 - 11:07 AM, said:

SRM2, 2 tons with 1 ton of ammo, combined 2 tons: 4 damage and 2 heat every 2 seconds
2x SPL(MWO), 2 ton: 8 damage and 4 heat every 2.25 seconds
2x SPL(TT), 2 ton: 6 damage and 4 heat every X seconds

X as a variable since TT has no recycle times.

Looks balanced to me, even with the current cycle MWO time. Remember, SPLs are a short duration hitscan weapon, SRMs need to be lead and still spread damage.

Imho, far from useless. Just not the definitive fast brawler weapon that it is now, especially for the Clan version.

What the heck does the SRM2 have to do with the SPL's TT values? Beyond that, the SRM2 is also a weapon that almost never gets used, so that doesn't make a very good baseline...

The ML or ERML are better baselines because they have the same weight as the SPL (1 ton for all of them) and they are also energy weapons. In that case, the [ER]ML utterly curbstomps the TT SPL into the ground. 3 damage for 2 heat at 1 ton is just bad.

You'd have to give them way faster cooldowns or something to make them worthwhile over the medium class energy weapons if they had their TT damage/heat values.

Edited by FupDup, 24 January 2016 - 11:22 AM.

[MauttyKoray]

Yeonne Greene, on 24 January 2016 - 09:40 AM, said:

When Deathlike was hosting his PTS trial sessions, we discussed giving LRMs an acceleration period. That is to say, they move increasingly faster with distance traveled. That lets them reach long-range targets much quicker without obsoleting SRMs or even later MRMs in the process with LRMs that reach close-in targets too quickly.

Have an acceleration over distance factor? That actually sounds really good, that way the shorter distance LRMs would still take a bit to travel but the further they are the faster they'll come in on the target. It would give LRMs a more effective usage at their 700-1000m range especially where everyone complains about them not doing anything for the team. -rolls eyes-

I would actually like to point this topic back toward the OP and get some actual feedback on that. It needs tweaking, but numbers on paper will never be accurate without the live environment needed to test these things. (I WISH I had access to a build of MWO where I could tweak this stuff, I'd be at it every day after work lol.)

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Marcel Bekker, on 24 January 2016 - 10:54 AM, said:

It would be better to wipe the slate clean, default the stats that can be defaulted back to TT values, and start balancing around these values by adjusting values that are specific to MWO... cycle times, projectile speeds, laser duration.

Just want to point out, that is how we got where we are now. This game started out with default TT values back in Closed Beta....

[Y E O N N E]

MauttyKoray, on 24 January 2016 - 11:21 AM, said:

Have an acceleration over distance factor? That actually sounds really good, that way the shorter distance LRMs would still take a bit to travel but the further they are the faster they'll come in on the target. It would give LRMs a more effective usage at their 700-1000m range especially where everyone complains about them not doing anything for the team. -rolls eyes-

I mean, they are missiles. They tend to accelerate a bit slower than a bullet and hit peak velocity further away than the muzzle.

Actually, I've always felt that IS LRMs would be really cool if they were launched from their tubes using powder charges with the rocket motors kicking on at the 170 m point and arming by 180 meters.

[adamts01]

Marcel Bekker, on 24 January 2016 - 11:07 AM, said:

SRM2, 2 tons with 1 ton of ammo, combined 2 tons: 4 damage and 2 heat every 2 seconds
2x SPL(MWO), 2 ton: 8 damage and 4 heat every 2.25 seconds
2x SPL(TT), 2 ton: 6 damage and 4 heat every X seconds

X as a variable since TT has no recycle times.

Looks balanced to me, even with the current cycle MWO time. Remember, SPLs are a short duration hitscan weapon, SRMs need to be lead and still spread damage.

Imho, far from useless. Just not the definitive fast brawler weapon that it is now, especially for the Clan version.

You can boat more SPLs than SRMs without ghost heat. This game is all about a big alpha, the SPL when boated has more than double the alpha of SRM2s, SRM ammo explodes and runs out, SRMs are very funny with hit reg on occasion.

Doesn't look so balanced after all.

[Marcel Bekker]

Yeonne Greene, on 24 January 2016 - 11:14 AM, said:

This is where I disagree. We can keep the tonnage and slots and then add performance metrics to make weapons worth their investments, but the rest was arguably never balanced to begin with. TT operated on a Battle Value system combined with C-bill economics and, sometimes, special effects to make the use of inferior, cheaper equipment viable. It also worked with a random hit generator and deleterious effects for things like accuracy. We don't have that here. In MWO, every 'Mech implicitly has the same Battle Value because it's 12 v. 12 no matter what, even if there's 12 lights vs. 12 heavies and all of those lights only have flamers while all of those heavies have Gauss and C-LPL.

It is, simply, too different to use as the framework for MWO. Not even MW:LL used the TT values. Certain TT rules and the lore should only serve as guidelines to inform your new, purpose-built rules and maintain the spirit of the stories. A MechWarrior shooter cannot and should not ever be a reinterpretation of the Table Top game.

This is exactly what I was getting at. Imho(!), adaptation of TT damage, heat and range(roughly) can be made to work in MWO, using just the values that TT does not possess, laser durations, recycle times, projectile speeds, the way a weapon delivers its damage - multiple small vs one large shot - etc. etc.

All these things inherent to MWO could very well balance out whatever imbalances exist in the TT values... just as quirks try to balance out suboptimal hardpoint locations, like low slung arms. Then again, Mechs should be able to raise their arms over obstructions if they possess a lower arm actuator. Lorewise, that happens automaticly if the Mechs Battle Computer (coupled to the Neurohelmet) detects a weapon being obstructed from the target.

And then there is the one big thing that imho needs to be made to work in MWO... the convergence system. Instant Pinpoint convergence is one of the main causes of all the balance problems. If it would work, we would have another huge factor to balance the game.

Mhm...
Now that I think about it, there is a modified ruleset, the Solaris VII dueling rules, which split a TT turn (10 seconds) into 4 subturns and adds partial recycle times... maybe this would be a better starting point?

Yeonne Greene, on 24 January 2016 - 11:14 AM, said:

It wouldn't be broken for a long time if PGI would commit themselves to rapid-release balance fixing session over a few months. And they can't do it on PTS, because not enough people play PTS. They could turn off stat-tracking in the main server for awhile so nobody gets mad at tanking due to equipment being in flux.

That sounds like a good idea, at least to me. I am all for it.

FupDup, on 24 January 2016 - 11:16 AM, said:

What the heck does the SRM2 have to do with the SPL's TT values? Beyond that, the SRM2 is also a weapon that almost never gets used, so that doesn't make a very good baseline...

The ML or ERML are better baselines because they have the same weight as the SPL (1 ton for all of them) and they are also energy weapons. In that case, the [ER]ML utterly curbstomps the TT SPL into the ground. 3 damage for 2 heat at 1 ton is just bad.

You'd have to give them way faster cooldowns or something to make them worthwhile over the medium class energy weapons if they had their TT damage/heat values.

Exactly!

And nowhere do you see anything from me that says they should keep the current cycle times, durations etc. if they were to be adjusted to TT dmg/heat values.

The thing is, we need a baseline, something that is set in stone and not changeable, so that balance can be achieved around these by modifying the values that are unique to the MWO "FPS" gametype.

adamts01, on 24 January 2016 - 11:32 AM, said:

You can boat more SPLs than SRMs without ghost heat. This game is all about a big alpha, the SPL when boated has more than double the alpha of SRM2s, SRM ammo explodes and runs out, SRMs are very funny with hit reg on occasion.

Doesn't look so balanced after all.

I meant it looked balanced using the TT dmg values, not the MWO ones. Especially not for the CSPL (6dmg/3heat). I think you simply misread my post, or I did not make my point clear enough. ^^

PS: And when I do not constantly Edit, I end up posting 3 posts in a row... seriously...

Edited by Marcel Bekker, 24 January 2016 - 11:53 AM.

[Barantor]

This is all rather moot in a way though since the heat system in this game doesn't reflect well on the TT heat system and what it does to the mech overall as it increases. If we had thresholds on heat that affected things like speed, movement and accuracy then we would have a better overall picture of what the original intent of the values of the weapons were from TT.

Basically you can't use parts of the TT system without a lot of it becoming really unbalanced in a hurry and this isn't to say that the TT would be balanced with current "super omni" way we can redesign the weapon loadouts for mechs.

It is never just ONE thing or even group of things with this game, it is the whole shebang.

[Marcel Bekker]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 24 January 2016 - 11:27 AM, said:

Just want to point out, that is how we got where we are now. This game started out with default TT values back in Closed Beta....

No, that is where we started from. All of the ill thought out and shortsighted bandaid fixes got us to where we are now. Fyi, I was in the closed Beta, just with a different account. And whenever I read others comparing back then to now, the general consensus is that back then was preferable.

Barantor, on 24 January 2016 - 11:56 AM, said:

This is all rather moot in a way though since the heat system in this game doesn't reflect well on the TT heat system and what it does to the mech overall as it increases. If we had thresholds on heat that affected things like speed, movement and accuracy then we would have a better overall picture of what the original intent of the values of the weapons were from TT.

Basically you can't use parts of the TT system without a lot of it becoming really unbalanced in a hurry and this isn't to say that the TT would be balanced with current "super omni" way we can redesign the weapon loadouts for mechs.

It is never just ONE thing or even group of things with this game, it is the whole shebang.

Exactly. Because you can not pick and choose a few things from the source material, ignore others, and make the rest up as you go along. But that is what PGI/IGP did.

Edited by Marcel Bekker, 24 January 2016 - 12:01 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Marcel Bekker, on 24 January 2016 - 11:57 AM, said:

No, that is where we started from. All of the ill thought out and shortsighted bandaid fixes got us to where we are now. Fyi, I was in the closed Beta, just with a different account. And whenever I read others comparing back then to now, the general consensus is that back then was preferable.

We also had no DHS, no endo, no ferro, no ECM, no Clan tech. Bandaids existed to deal with the power creep that was introduced.

I liked Closed Beta a lot, but not because it clung to BT values, because those are still part of the reason for so many imbalances. TT is far from perfect, and limiting yourself to non-TT existent values is just that, limiting yourself and allowing for overlap in role for certain weapons.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 24 January 2016 - 12:03 PM.

[MauttyKoray]

Barantor, on 24 January 2016 - 11:56 AM, said:

This is all rather moot in a way though since the heat system in this game doesn't reflect well on the TT heat system and what it does to the mech overall as it increases. If we had thresholds on heat that affected things like speed, movement and accuracy then we would have a better overall picture of what the original intent of the values of the weapons were from TT.

Basically you can't use parts of the TT system without a lot of it becoming really unbalanced in a hurry and this isn't to say that the TT would be balanced with current "super omni" way we can redesign the weapon loadouts for mechs.

It is never just ONE thing or even group of things with this game, it is the whole shebang.

I'd like to point out my OP in this topic was not about TT, but balancing the weapons in game as they are and modifying existing systems to pull back the power creep and imbalance that is occurring.

[Sandpit]

Khobai, on 24 January 2016 - 09:25 AM, said:

That is the problem with LRMs. Theyre not actually long-range. They cant outrange other direct fire weapons so they lose to other direct fire weapons.

They need to make LRMs into actual long range missiles that can hit things at 1000m. But they also need to nerf indirect LRMs so they only work if the target is TAGGED or NARCED.

agreed, but I knew stuff like this would become an issue the minute PGI stated "optimal" combat range was 600m. They did everything they could to push combat to that range area and below in the name of "brawling". THen they started condensing RoFs, ranges, Ammo loads, etc. to encourage that. It was in large part due to original map sizes. Hell, if you could shoot 1200 meters 2 years ago you were literally shooting opponents immediately after spawning sometimes.

Now, with bigger maps like Alpine and Polar, you HAVE to close to that range unless you have specifically built chassis using the quirk system to build a very specific mech type. Yes, LRMs can fire out to 1000m. They also move so slowly that nobody except very slow mechs caught out in the wide open is going to get hit by them very often, which means....
you guessed it, now you have to close range even with long range weapons to have an effective combat range.

PGI will have to address it very soon though if the rest of their maps are going to be built like Polar.