92 replies to this topic

[Pariah Devalis]

Gas Guzzler, on 20 January 2016 - 09:05 AM, said:

As far as Clan mechs, I agree. Definitely not saturated yet. Funny this topic gets brought up... The Turkina fulfills a saturated role (Dire Wolf is the slow mega death machine), while the Kingfisher is something different. SEE? SEEE?

Still don't see it as anything more than an inferior Executioner. However, our Clan assault omnis are saturated, right now, as far as potential role. Our Heavies and Lights are almost saturated, but our Mediums have quite a bit of room to play with yet.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 20 January 2016 - 09:11 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Bishop Steiner, on 20 January 2016 - 09:07 AM, said:

IS that really a niche, I mean we have 70 and 80 tonners that do that (or close).... seems more like a want than a true empty niche. I mean, IDK I don't think we need to duplicate every role/layout in every tonnage. Just me though.

It would be nice. Victor and Cataphract just don't seem to do it that well though. Not enough hardpoints or knuckle draggers and hardpoints aren't concentrated enough. If the DS had one more hardpoint in its RT I would be good.

Pariah Devalis, on 20 January 2016 - 09:11 AM, said:

Still don't see it as anything more than an inferior Executioner. However, our Clan assault omnis are saturated, right now, as far as potential role. Our Heavies and Lights are almost saturated, but our Mediums have quite a bit of room to play with yet.

Well, the fact that it has a standard engine, still sounds like leeway for quirks to be imparted on it to me. So it would fill the role of tanky energy assault, much like the Banshee on the IS side. Executioner is more focused on mobility.

But the Turkina... it is essentially a slightly inferior Dire Wolf. Which is why I call it the Dire Turkey.

[Bishop Steiner]

Pariah Devalis, on 20 January 2016 - 09:11 AM, said:

Still don't see it as anything more than an inferior Executioner. However, our Clan assault omnis are saturated, right now, as far as potential role. Our Heavies and Lights are almost saturated, but our Mediums have quite a bit of room to play with yet.

which is why std engine omnis should be quirked to be tanks..then it's something different, quiaff?

Whether it's tied to the MEchs (easiest) or to std engines themselves (probably best)

[Pariah Devalis]

Gas Guzzler, on 20 January 2016 - 09:11 AM, said:

It would be nice. Victor and Cataphract just don't seem to do it that well though. Not enough hardpoints or knuckle draggers and hardpoints aren't concentrated enough. If the DS had one more hardpoint in its RT I would be good.

I suppose a Thunder Hawk would be an interesting addition to the IS assault list.

[Almond Brown]

pbiggz, on 20 January 2016 - 08:41 AM, said:

IS ER small/medium lasers
IS Streak SRM 4/6
IS UAC 2/10/20
IS LBX 2/5/20
IS MRMs
IS Light PPCs
IS Snub Nosed PPCs

Clan ATMs
Clan Heavy Lasers

Bring in these tech 2 weapons.

Also its funny how civil this thread is, since every time imperius ever made a thread to the same effect his fan club came in force.

That is a nice list but all that does is give the I.S. the same stuff as the Clans have, thus one can expect similar Heat/Damage and Ranges would be applied or "balance" is whacked yet again...

P.S. The Light PPC is not a better weapon at 5 pt of damage for it weight and same range as the parent weapon system. Carrying 2 saves 1 slot and almost exact other stats... Unless they radically speed them up, what would be the point, and if they did speed them up a lot, then the regular PPC becomes "obsolete" and that defeats the whole purpose of having new stuff right????

[Bishop Steiner]

Pariah Devalis, on 20 January 2016 - 09:14 AM, said:

I suppose a Thunder Hawk would be an interesting addition to the IS assault list.

prefer the gunslinger, personally. Or pillager.

[Pariah Devalis]

Bishop Steiner, on 20 January 2016 - 09:15 AM, said:

prefer the gunslinger, personally. Or pillager.

All good choices. I was just looking for an assault with heavy ballistics in its arms and still fits the timeline slice.

[Bishop Steiner]

Almond Brown, on 20 January 2016 - 09:15 AM, said:

That is a nice list but all that does is give the I.S. the same stuff as the Clans have, thus one can expect similar Heat/Damage and Ranges would be applied or "balance" is whacked yet again...

P.S. The Light PPC is not a better weapon at 5 pt of damage for it weight and same range as the parent weapon system. Carrying 2 saves 1 slot and almost exact other stats... Unless they radically speed them up, what would be the point, and if they did speed them up a lot, then the regular PPC becomes "obsolete" and that defeats the whole purpose of having new stuff right????

gives a nice ranged weapon alternative to lighter mechs though. And better heat control For instance a locust with 1 in each arm can volley fire at range if they get hot, where a single PPC might shut it down... also keeps it from being totally disarmed in one shot.

The tech has it's uses... it's just incorrect to assume throwing more plates in the air will make the juggler juggle better.

Pariah Devalis, on 20 January 2016 - 09:17 AM, said:

All good choices. I was just looking for an assault with heavy ballistics in its arms and still fits the timeline slice.

Gunslinger predates Thunderhawk (well, current factory builds of thunderhawk)

[pbiggz]

Almond Brown, on 20 January 2016 - 09:15 AM, said:

That is a nice list but all that does is give the I.S. the same stuff as the Clans have, thus one can expect similar Heat/Damage and Ranges would be applied or "balance" is whacked yet again...

P.S. The Light PPC is not a better weapon at 5 pt of damage for it weight and same range as the parent weapon system. Carrying 2 saves 1 slot and almost exact other stats... Unless they radically speed them up, what would be the point, and if they did speed them up a lot, then the regular PPC becomes "obsolete" and that defeats the whole purpose of having new stuff right????

Why are you paying attention to tabletop values?

The only values that matter are tonnage and crit slots because PGI doesn't want to break TT builds. Everything else is up to interpretation. If a light PPC is too good, it should be pre-nerfed before it hits.

[Bishop Steiner]

For the record, I would love love love some Light PPCs, Light ACs and such...speaking as a Medium Mech guy, it opens up some nice possibilities.

[J-Pax7]

I never understood why the real time games always used the weapon rating system of the turn based table top game. It is my understanding that, for example the ac20 is a 'catch all' rating of guns that are in actuality vastly different weapons with a range of calibers, rates of fire, firing modes, ammo types etc. I believe if they dropped the rating system and release specific weapons it would add more variety and also allow the devs to tweak and balance weapons to a far larger degree.

I'm strongly in favor of staying 100% through to the lore of battletech but the insistence on staying through to the table top rules for a realtime pseudo-sim is beyond me and make the game seem over symplified

[Bishop Steiner]

pbiggz, on 20 January 2016 - 09:18 AM, said:

Why are you paying attention to tabletop values?

The only values that matter are tonnage and crit slots because PGI doesn't want to break TT builds. Everything else is up to interpretation. If a light PPC is too good, it should be pre-nerfed before it hits.

because he is looking at linear math and application. Which in this case doesn't help. And why I used a different approach to demonstrate their value apples to apples.

But yes, the final heat, cycle times and such are very much open to interpretation.

Paul Crux, on 20 January 2016 - 09:19 AM, said:

I never understood why the real time games always used the weapon rating system of the turn based table top game. It is my understanding that, for example the ac20 is a 'catch all' rating of guns that are in actuality vastly different weapons with a range of calibers, rates of fire, firing modes, ammo types etc. I believe if they dropped the rating system and release specific weapons it would add more variety and also allow the devs to tweak and balance weapons to a far larger degree.

I'm strongly in favor of staying 100% through to the lore of battletech but the insistence on staying through to the table top rules for a realtime pseudo-sim is beyond me and make the game seem over symplified

we left those rules long ago. But you add too many moving parts you get an even bigger mess than we have.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Tom Sawyer, on 20 January 2016 - 04:28 AM, said:

However I am just curious to know others feel? Should PGI consider adding in new weapons by advancing the time a few years? This would introduce new mech possibilities too. Or should they really buckle down and fix what we have before introducing new weapons which will lead to new variations on the mechs we already have?

Advancing the timeline won't fix the issue of the sameness especially if balance problems stick around.

There are multitudes of problems contributing to the sameness.

• The 3 variant system that has created homogeneous/pointless variants (Kintaro, Dragon, Grasshopper, Black Knight, etc).
  
• The only thing really separating mechs is often quirks, number of hardpoints, and hitboxes. This makes balance a little harder since the same config can be repeated throughout all of them generally with one clear winner. I still support some version of sized hardpoints.
  
• Weapons aren't really designed for different roles like they probably ought too. There isn't a big difference in the point of pulse vs standard and it gets worse with later weapons like x-pulse and heavy lasers; or for example or how LBX2s are pointless variants of AC2s mainly because they all compete for rapid fire suppression weapons and will all be pointless once we get RAC2s.
  
• A few more things that I just am too lazy to point out.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 20 January 2016 - 09:22 AM.

[Xalus]

I see a bunch of people talking about the TT and the timeline as if they should ever be used as rules in a video game. The TT rules don't equate well to a real-time video game, and should never be used in a serious argument for balancing MWO. The timeline idea is horrible. You should NEVER put lore before gameplay. All the timeline is doing is limiting mech, and most importantly, weapon options.

We don't need more mechs, we need more weapons, maps, and a playable CW for the longevity of MWO.

[Sylonce]

I have a few fun mechs, but a lot of my chassis carry similar loadouts

As tempted as I was to get the Warhammer, I'd probably end up loading it up similar to at least one of my Marauders anyways.

So yes, there is a bit of sameness going on. I suppose it is partly my fault, but I got to somehow survive the onslaught of the meta somehow.

This said, I've only really bought two or three packs with real money: Timby, Urbie, and Marauder. By far, the best purchase has been the Urbie. If anything, it is the most differentiated mech of them all

Edited by Sylonce, 20 January 2016 - 09:44 AM.

[Tom Sawyer]

Things we have hashed out I figured i would add to consider and IF PGI could even program:

variable ammo. I believe the consensus from the devs was that either the engine could not support this or that they just can not program it. Be nice to see solid shot, frangible shot, SMERSH, AP, ect ect Then you have the missile load outs

articulated arms: Again programming would be a stone cold {Dezgra}. But seeing an Atlas raise its arms over a hill to shoot?

melee: after dragon bowling I think this one is a dead turkey. But the ax-man or swordsman sigh

[cSand]

To answer OP

yes yes it has

Prime example is the Warhammer. Yes it looks nice but after playing it last night I can see it just a cosmetic difference and actually quite a boring mech as far as functions are concerned. Jagermech, Hopper, and Phract all do the same thing just as well or better. Basically another energy-boating heavy mech. Oh and the Black Knight, same deal. At least the MAD had some JJs and interesting hard points.

PGI should have used sized hardpoints, or some system to limit the currently limitless customization abilities. I also think some chassis should have had hard locked weapons in certain spots. For example, the Warhammer, should only be allowed PPCs or ER PPCs in it's arms. Or the AC20 hunch variant should only be allowed an AC20 in the hunch. Mind you with sized hardpoints this would be unnecessary anyways.

Quirks had the potential to add some flavour to chassis, but instead we just got "+15% energy range" etc etc that apply to the whole chassis. Something funny, is that so many mechs have the same energy quirks. Well, why not just buff the damn weapons then, and stop adding minimal energy quirks to every chassis!

Would have loved to see some radar quirks, mobility quirks, JJ quirks, other more creative stuff (the BLR hero had those heat quirks that gave it a unique behaviour. More stuff like that would have been great.)

Edited by cSand, 20 January 2016 - 11:33 AM.

[Yosharian]

PGI has the all the tools it needs right in front of it to enable diversity. It just needs someone competent and confident at the quirk/weapon balancing steering wheel.

[Marcel Bekker]

Tom Sawyer, on 20 January 2016 - 10:47 AM, said:

variable ammo. I believe the consensus from the devs was that either the engine could not support this or that they just can not program it. Be nice to see solid shot, frangible shot, SMERSH, AP, ect ect Then you have the missile load outs

articulated arms: Again programming would be a stone cold {Dezgra}. But seeing an Atlas raise its arms over a hill to shoot?

This. So much of this. If I could upvote your post multiple times, I would. Articulated arms especially, since this would elegantly circumvent the "low mounted hardpoint" issue. Mech battlecomputers are supposed to register when a weapon, that was ordered to fire by the pilot, is blocked from hitting the intended target, and compensate by changing the mechs stance or arm position.

That would probably be quite time intensive to code and get to work properly.

[Alistair Winter]

I think mech packs will always appeal to new players due to the benefits of preordering. You've just started playing the game, your mind is blown by how long it takes to grind C-bills to buy new mechs, engines and modules, and then you see those huge pre-order bonuses for $15 mech packs.

I don't think that will stop, as long as MWO has a decent amount of new players.

New weapons will revitalize the game to a certain degree, but it won't necessarily have any direct effect on mech sales. It's not like old mechs won't be able to equip new weapons. And we already have basically every combination of hardpoints you can imagine.

It's quite possible they will start working on 3060 tech right after CW Phase 3 goes live.