122 replies to this topic

[stjobe]

Sigilum Sanctum, on 07 January 2016 - 09:51 PM, said:

I've pretty much accepted the fact that PGI has given up on the Vindicator.

**** you, Paul.

Commando said:

Did someone say something? Guys? Guuuys? Hello?

[TexAce]

LordBraxton, on 08 January 2016 - 09:07 AM, said:

lolololol! so true!

I think the Centurion should be the super durable IS medium!

Its got NO JJs, low amounts of energy hardpoints, a wide profile, and chest or belly level weapons!

Yet the scrawny high-mounted-laser-spam blackjack got all the love

can't agree more

[Koniving]

El Bandito, on 08 January 2016 - 07:17 AM, said:

You must also include armor--which is more effective than structures in defense, into consideration.

Now compare it to smaller, and heavier mechs... or even to the 45 ton Vindicator with crappier hardpoints and taller than a Timber Wolf.

Is it fair?

[Lyoto Machida]

Pjwned, on 07 January 2016 - 08:04 PM, said:

Blame players for PGI's incompetence?

Well, before I got onto these forums, I was under the assumption that game developers designed games and set the rules in place that drove player behavior. After having been here for awhile, I now see that I am incorrect and it is actually the player base that actually designs the game...hence why the players should be blamed.

If you need any proof of this, just look at some of the CW threads on player behavior in the game. If the players can't recode the game properly to prevent certain types of behavior from happening (spawn camping, mercs switching factions frequently to gain rewards, etc), maybe they should outsource the work to people who actually can.

It's just terrible that PGI has to sit by and watch all this happen while being completely powerless to do anything about it. It would probably drive me away from my own forums and resort to Twitter as well if it happened to me, so I can't really blame Russ for that route of communication.

[Aiden Skye]

I would like some of those structure or PPC quirks for my Shadowcat

[Mcgral18]

W A R K H A N, on 08 January 2016 - 02:05 PM, said:

I would like some of those structure or PPC quirks for my Shadowcat

Duration plz

[Jman5]

Koniving, on 07 January 2016 - 05:14 PM, said:

Has anyone taken note of quirks as of lately?

Because I'm sitting on a 45 ton mech with 326 structure.
For comparison, I should probably mention that after quirks, a Hunchback gets 178+12 for 190 structure. For 50 tons.

The King Crab, Dire Wolf, and Atlas before quirks...which there aren't that many quirks to be had there... have 316 structure.

Yet I have a Blackjack with 326 structure. Not only that, but evidently ALL the Blackjacks have MORE structure than the 100 ton assaults.

Just...what....the... what are they thinking?

....Do they think?

Has this gone unnoticed?

Black jack gets +629 hitpoints with quirks.

The Atlas gets +1,076 hitpoints with quirks.

The King Crab gets +961 hitpoints with quirks.

The Direwolf has 927 hitpoints and no quirks.

[TyphonCh]

I had a game the other day in my dual guass Mauler and came across a BJ with an exposed yellow left torso at 300m. I had an exposed yellow CT. I hit that torso with both my gauss and splashed it with 6 ml and it was still standing with dark orange internals. He then alpha'd my CT and I was the one who died.
I was very bitter.. It's gotten to the point where your structure is more powerful than your armor.
I don't disagree with structure quirks. But some are way over done. I liked the fragility and danger of exposed parts. It doesn't make sense internal components stripped of their armor take more of a beating than the armor itself.
It's ****** stupid. I feel like they put all the quirks in one hat, and the mechs in another and just started pulling at random.
It's what? The 4th quirk pass and some mechs are still left in the dust, getting craptastic quirks and sometimes NO structure. Commandos anyone? They might be OP, better give them acceleration quirks instead of structure. Like wtf.

Edited by Team Chevy86, 08 January 2016 - 02:28 PM.

[kapusta11]

Edit: I'm dumb

Edited by kapusta11, 08 January 2016 - 02:23 PM.

[Monkey Lover]

Oh know 4 lasers worth of structure quirks the world is going to end lol

[Koniving]

Jman5, on 08 January 2016 - 02:16 PM, said:

Black jack gets +629 hitpoints with quirks.

The Atlas gets +1,076 hitpoints with quirks.

The King Crab gets +961 hitpoints with quirks.

The Direwolf has 927 hitpoints and no quirks.

While I'm aware of this, consider also that Vindicator 45 tons gets:
526 effective HP after quirks (despite being as tall as most 80 ton mechs!!!!)
Hunchback, 50 tons: After quirks 546 effective HP.
Trebuchet, 50 tons and nearly as tall as an Atlas: 580 effective HP.
At 55 tons:
Griffin gets 614 effective HP. OR! IN the case of the VERY BEST GRIFFIN EVER -- before quirks... you get (after quirks) 658 because the best must be even bettah than all the rest! (Where the **** is the logic here?)
Kintaro, despite how everyone complains on how terrible they are, gets 608 effective HP.
Shadowhawk gets 611 effective HP.


I'm sorry but the logic here is completely lost. It's 45 goddamn tons. All of these mediums have way too much in the way of bonuses, as do some of the lights, as do many of the mechs in general. None of these would be necessary if the mechs didn't all have "faster firing" bonuses. None of this **** would have been necessary if these guys dug a little bit into the lore and paid more attention to aspects such as scale, hardpoint limitations, and especially weapon design.

[Col Jaime Wolf]

actually the quirks have gotten way out of hand. mechs literally are "viable" or not depending on quirks now.

not hardpoints, not tonnage, not hardpoint location no quirks are the single deciding factor.

its the very definition of horse ****

[stjobe]

Koniving, on 08 January 2016 - 02:51 PM, said:

None of this **** would have been necessary if these guys dug a little bit into the lore and paid more attention to aspects such as scale, hardpoint limitations, and especially weapon design.

Hey now, Paul has played a couple of hours with the TT game, isn't that enough?

But you're absolutely correct. If these guys had not done such a craptastic job of translating BT to MWO, none of this would be necessary. Just to reiterate a few of the bigger fails:

* No heat penalties besides shutting down at 100%
* Roughly tripled rate of fire, but no decrease in damage or heat per shot, nor any increase in dissipation.
* Instant and perfect convergence of all weapons.

I mean, it's a game. It's even fun from time to time. But it sure as hell isn't "a BattleTech game".

[Koniving]

stjobe, on 08 January 2016 - 03:05 PM, said:

Hey now, Paul has played a couple of hours with the TT game, isn't that enough?

But you're absolutely correct. If these guys had not done such a craptastic job of translating BT to MWO, none of this would be necessary. Just to reiterate a few of the bigger fails:

* No heat penalties besides shutting down at 100%
* Roughly tripled rate of fire, but no decrease in damage or heat per shot, nor any increase in dissipation.
* Instant and perfect convergence of all weapons.

I mean, it's a game. It's even fun from time to time. But it sure as hell isn't "a BattleTech game".

"Nexon" in Paul's experience explains.... a lot. I mean a lot. From mech pricing to certain gimmicks.

David's experience, he played "several miniatures games" but in a Q&A some years back he said this rather memorable line: "An Awesome 8Q could take its 30 SHS and 3 PPCs, and fire indefinitely without ever experiencing any heat." When asked about having a 1 to 1 heat and cooling ratio with tabletop. First off it had 28 SHS not 30, but going beyond that... Yes, it'd gain heat. Heat would go up and down across 10 seconds. Now mind you the PPCs had a 3 second recycle time, so you could fire a single PPC 4 times in 9 seconds. But he believed with 28 SHS you'd never experience heat? And that's why we can't have a tabletop heat neutral build be as effective when used once per 10 seconds?

Make a heat neutral build, even with the new super SHS (but don't take that into account, make one for tabletop). Mind you this has to mean "heat neutral" with laser or PPC weaponry. Now, fire that heat neutral build once every 10 seconds.

Make it heat neutral for 5 seconds. Try again.

Notice something interesting? Trust me, you will.
There are hidden mechanics that make traditional heat neutrality impossible. Not just ghost heat.
Now build a mech with 24 or more DHS and a single flamer. Hold the flamer on for about a minute... you'll start building heat even though it's mathematically impossible. (This same system is hidden on MANY weapons in MWO, but not all. For example it's on medium and small lasers, but not on medium and small pulse lasers...).

Edited by Koniving, 08 January 2016 - 03:24 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Koniving, on 08 January 2016 - 03:23 PM, said:

"Nexon" in Paul's experience explains.... a lot. I mean a lot. From mech pricing to certain gimmicks.

David's experience, he played "several miniatures games" but in a Q&A some years back he said this rather memorable line: "An Awesome 8Q could take its 30 SHS and 3 PPCs, and fire indefinitely without ever experiencing any heat." When asked about having a 1 to 1 heat and cooling ratio with tabletop. First off it had 28 SHS not 30, but going beyond that... Yes, it'd gain heat. Heat would go up and down across 10 seconds. Now mind you the PPCs had a 3 second recycle time, so you could fire a single PPC 4 times in 9 seconds. But he believed with 28 SHS you'd never experience heat? And that's why we can't have a tabletop heat neutral build be as effective when used once per 10 seconds?

Make a heat neutral build, even with the new super SHS (but don't take that into account, make one for tabletop). Mind you this has to mean "heat neutral" with laser or PPC weaponry. Now, fire that heat neutral build once every 10 seconds.

Make it heat neutral for 5 seconds. Try again.

Notice something interesting? Trust me, you will.
There are hidden mechanics that make traditional heat neutrality impossible. Not just ghost heat.
Now build a mech with 24 or more DHS and a single flamer. Hold the flamer on for about a minute... you'll start building heat even though it's mathematically impossible. (This same system is hidden on MANY weapons in MWO, but not all. For example it's on medium and small lasers, but not on medium and small pulse lasers...).

I'm more concerned about the weapons that seem to "heat lock" you bar, while firing.

[Jon Gotham]

Somebody had a bright idea in another thread, i forget which one and sadly I also for got who (sorry fella) he said perhaps any quirks should be on the weapons not the mechs...

E.G: A large laser from one manufacturer could have say, +10 range but +10 heat. Another could have -15% duration but +5% cooldown etc
Certain mechs could only mount certain sets oif equipment to prevent monster op combos...?

You could do the same for clans, maybe say give them an ERLL that has -20% duration but is one ton heavier? that sort of thing?

[Koniving]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 January 2016 - 03:24 PM, said:

I'm more concerned about the weapons that seem to "heat lock" you bar, while firing.

There's that, too. So many little 'micro' mechanisms. Even Smurfy himself said "there is no way to explain what happens with flamers." He went on to effectively state: "It makes absolutely no sense."

(This was said in 2014.)

Edited by Koniving, 09 January 2016 - 06:55 AM.

[Dracol]

Koniving, on 08 January 2016 - 02:51 PM, said:

While I'm aware of this, consider also that Vindicator 45 tons gets:
526 effective HP after quirks (despite being as tall as most 80 ton mechs!!!!)
Hunchback, 50 tons: After quirks 546 effective HP.
Trebuchet, 50 tons and nearly as tall as an Atlas: 580 effective HP.
At 55 tons:
Griffin gets 614 effective HP. OR! IN the case of the VERY BEST GRIFFIN EVER -- before quirks... you get (after quirks) 658 because the best must be even bettah than all the rest! (Where the **** is the logic here?)
Kintaro, despite how everyone complains on how terrible they are, gets 608 effective HP.
Shadowhawk gets 611 effective HP.


I'm sorry but the logic here is completely lost. It's 45 goddamn tons. All of these mediums have way too much in the way of bonuses, as do some of the lights, as do many of the mechs in general. None of these would be necessary if the mechs didn't all have "faster firing" bonuses. None of this **** would have been necessary if these guys dug a little bit into the lore and paid more attention to aspects such as scale, hardpoint limitations, and especially weapon design.

Statements like these make it sound like people are advocating for mechs of heavier tonnage to always be superior to lighter mechs. PGI make it clear at the begining they were not building a BT game were greater tonnage = better. "Not an arms race".

With that said, the argument saying a lower tonnage mech can never have the durabilty greater than a heavier mech is directly opposed to that core concept of MWO not being an arms race to the heaviest mech.

Does the Blackjack deserve the high bonus? Maybe /maybe not. To me, the fixed arms give the same torso vunerability as the Jager. Also, overall tonnage for dealing damage is limited. It needs longer game time to deal damage comparable to heavier mechs.

[Koniving]

Though Smurfy is very much aware of several micro mechanisms in the game's mechanics... They're just not quite possible to quantify or explain.

[FupDup]

Mellifluer, on 08 January 2016 - 03:00 PM, said:

actually the quirks have gotten way out of hand. mechs literally are "viable" or not depending on quirks now.

not hardpoints, not tonnage, not hardpoint location no quirks are the single deciding factor.

its the very definition of horse ****

What kind of uber quirks do mechs like the Stormcrow, Timberwolf, Cauldron Born, Hellbringer, Dire Wolf, and Arctic Cheetah have?

The actual situation looks like this:

Before quirks:
"This mech will be bad"
"This mech will be good"

After quirks:
"This mech will be bad...unless it gets good quirks"
"This mech will be good"