151 replies to this topic

[Rogue Jedi]

Ember Stormfield, on 30 January 2016 - 01:14 PM, said:

So can I do grouped matches solo? As others might be active in another drop or such, or do I just hope for another to be active so I can actually play the game?

Ether the notes were incomplete or you misinterpreted them.
The unit only queue is just for CW/FP, you can drop in the regular Quick Play solo queue, or quick play group queue, you just cannot drop in the solo CW queue, meaning even if ungrouped you will be dropping in the CW unit queue if you are part of a unit, as I understood it any groups as well as unit players will be in the unit queue, only solo players will be in the CW solo queue

Edited by Rogue Jedi, 03 February 2016 - 11:01 AM.

[NocturnalBeast]

Twilight Fenrir, on 03 February 2016 - 10:41 AM, said:

Where is that gorram Kodiak page?!?

Russ said tomorrow (Thursday) because they are taking their time to make it nice.

[Twilight Fenrir]

Ed Steele, on 03 February 2016 - 11:16 AM, said:

Russ said tomorrow (Thursday) because they are taking their time to make it nice.

Oh, thanks, I must have missed that somewhere!

[Talos7]

Yay! The Kodiak is upon us!

[Dawnstealer]

Gumon Choji, on 31 January 2016 - 02:09 PM, said:

Lasers. Russ has spoken of laser vomit many times. It is his passion of the last six months. So that will change as always. But lets be honest, running as IS when clans had too much laser power was bad. Really bad. Playing clan when IS quirks on lasers are high is bad real bad. To the point I change allegiances based on quirks. But some mechs are just better. The issue is geometry, and number of mounts. The arms race for mounts is what destabilizes the game. This was a problem in the beginning and the mounts were kept standard but now there are more and more. The issue with the clans is that with the pods the mechwarrior gets too many mounts. The new IS mechs get too many mounts. I want the mounts because I like winning but I also admit they wreck balance. So the issue is not the quirks but the number of mounts. Thus I wonder why there is not a quirk based on the fewer weapons the better the individual weapons are. let the mech have one L Laser with silly range if they sack the use of the mounts thus reward fewer guns but do not punish more guns. I suggest this as there are realy 2 gun types that are reliably useful as a lone weapon, the AC 20 and the Gauss. As a locust I have used the quirked range on a large pulse and shot non stop in a game. My damage was a little north of 300. I did not miss. One gun is silly thus let one gun builds get those range quirks, two is good thus the range is not needed, three is ideal in the game now and heat is real here and more is death to a light in one shot. Being one shot is not fun.Thus my advice is make the quirk decay as hard points are used. nothing bad but if you want to boat your range is going to be normal. Deal with the mechanic that causes the problem (too many hard points with ranged weapons). On another note the M pulse is just barely too short range for how these maps are set up. Thus this weapon on the whole for IS needs some help as it is not a medium range engagement weapon.

I like this. I've also always thought that hardpoints should have a size limit attached as well as a type. So a Large Hardpoint can fit one LL, two MLs, or, I don't know, three SLs? Because the problem is mechs that load up a huge number of the same weapon when the original design was a few of this and that and usually a smaller weapon.

[stealthraccoon]

Dawnstealer, on 03 February 2016 - 01:29 PM, said:

I like this. I've also always thought that hardpoints should have a size limit attached as well as a type. So a Large Hardpoint can fit one LL, two MLs, or, I don't know, three SLs? Because the problem is mechs that load up a huge number of the same weapon when the original design was a few of this and that and usually a smaller weapon.

Just to be nit picky, I can't stand that a PPC takes an entire Warhammer/Vindicator arm (visually) but yet it can also be slung on an Locust/Commando/Spider arm.

[Twilight Fenrir]

Ed Steele, on 03 February 2016 - 11:16 AM, said:

Russ said tomorrow (Thursday) because they are taking their time to make it nice.

Woops! Guess he changed his mind!

https://mwomercs.com/kodiak



I think I need to change my pants...

[Aylek]

The Kodiak and it's variants are looking amazing!

[Twilight Fenrir]

Aylek, on 04 February 2016 - 06:47 AM, said:

The Kodiak and it's variants are looking amazing!

That Hero mech would have the same speed specs as a Koala! And I love the paint, on both the Hero and the S variant... Just.... Blah, wish the S wasn't so energy heavy... Really wish we could pick which mech the S goes onto... Without special Geo anymore, I don't see why that couldn't become a thing...

[LoganVI]

627, on 29 January 2016 - 05:25 PM, said:

First, MG should have the same DPS as an AC2 by lore. we are FAR away from that. And Crit damage... extra crit multiplier of tiny damage is still tiny damage. Crit damage is overrated anyhow.

And for the flamer, afaik it is 90% and it takes forever to do so and you'll likely overheat yourself (because that is not capped at 90%). Noone uses flamers beside trolling, there isn't even a "situational" thing. And blinding opponents doesn't count.

Machine guns should also have an optimal range of about 60m according to lore, which is why in lore they are a largely useless weapon. They exist in this game because this is an adaptation of BattleTech, where they have a small use, because in BattleTech there are infantry and tanks and damage assignment works different. A cluster of machine guns in BT can work because it increases hitting the CT or LT or whatever a second or third time, increasing chances of finishing it off or critting something. In this you can aim, and there are better weapons to aim with. They are about as situational in MWO as they are in BattleTech and if they were made more well rounded they actually have the potential to get into overpowered.
The Flamer is practically useless in the boardgame, outside of infantry killing, why should it be useful in MWO? In fact it is already more useful in MWO, occasionally you can actually overheat someone with it. There is still a situational use, if you are smart about it. Do not try to overheat a enemy from resting heat, try to overheat a laser boat that just let loose an alpha once or twice. It can work sometimes, more on hotter maps.
I feel bad for the people in time zones that could not participate in the town hall, but what did you want them to do? They operate on Pacific time, where they are based. Multiple town halls is not exactly reasonable and them bending over to make it centered around another time zone does not make sense for anyone except those in that time zone.
Complaining about deathball also makes little sense, it is a legitimate tactic that is used in the armoured corps and navies of the world. It is called force concentration. Basically works down to gamer theory, if one side splits into three groups of four and once goes into two groups of six then the sixs will beat the fours and then fall on the third four. If they go into a group of 12, then they will destroy the fours once by one. They have no way to control what are good tactics that we have been working on for literally thousands of years, except maybe game modes that force you to split up. Which is generally a bad call in Conquest because killing everyone lets you control the objectives easier. If both go into groups of four and of eight, the eight will beat the opposing group of four if it runs into it, which means the other eight runs into the other four and it all comes to equal. Best choice is to go twelve, or eleven with a distraction. There are actual math laws that support this as well, Lanchester's laws.

[Khobai]

Quote

First, MG should have the same DPS as an AC2 by lore

Yeah no. MG should not have the same DPS as AC2s. What youre forgetting is that MGs in MWO can be aimed. While MGs in battletech hit randomly locations. Random hit locations balances machine gun spam in battletech but theres nothing to balance machine gun spam in MWO.

You could build a shadowcat with 7 machine guns and 1 LPL, that does 16+ dps while remaining heat neutral. Thats way more dps than most atlases (and its heat neutral too!). That would be overpowered as hell.

MG definitely should not be 2 dps. But it does need a slight damage buff to 1 dps.

Buff MG bullets from 0.8 dps --> 1.0 dps and it would become a semi-viable weapon again.


The range modules for short range weapons also need to give a bigger bonus than 10%. The problem with having range modules be percentile based is that it favors long-range weapons much more than short-range weapons.

Edited by Khobai, 09 February 2016 - 04:46 PM.

[LoganVI]

Khobai, on 09 February 2016 - 12:38 PM, said:

Yeah no. MG should not have the same DPS as AC2s.

What youre forgetting is that MGs in MWO can be aimed. While MGs in battletech hit randomly locations.

Allowing 2 DPS machine guns that can be aimed at specific locations would be overpowered as all hell. You could build a shadowcat with 7 machine guns, that does 14 dps, for 0 heat.

MG would be perfectly viable at 1 DPS.

Agreed, they are niche weapons. Situational, they should have their uses but not uses that make them comparable to something like large or med lasers. A lot of these build decisions reminds me of building a good deck in Magic, which gets far more competitive than this and has a lot more to consider. Does not mean you do not see weird situational cards every now and then in tournaments where the top prize is thousands of dollars and that they are not fun to play. But the person using them needs to know what he is doing to do well with them in a competitive meta and he needs some luck.
Generally situational things are pretty strong if a lot of little things fall into place, if they were to be rebalanced so that that happens more that leads to them being overpowered, which is how kind of simple things get banned in Magic and people lose hundreds of dollars of value in their cards.