173 replies to this topic

[Alan Davion]

Black Ivan, on 07 May 2016 - 10:16 AM, said:

PGI could implement some sort of weapons converson or something so that all weapons fire won't hit one component

People have been campaigning on and off for cone of fire/convergence/whatever fixes for the last year, maybe two I can't recall exactly.

The problem is they always get shouted down by the "L33T $KI77$" Meta-Humpers, saying it would remove skill from the game and it would just turn into RNG-Hell.

[GreenHell]

Clam ER-Larges have the same damage over 1.25s as the Pearl ER-Larges. They just burn for .25s longer to get that extra damage. Similar story with Clam LPL's, they do the same DoT but burn longer for more total damage. Makes sense to me honestly. Makes the two sides actually play and feel different. I don't want a game where both sides are exactly the same.

As to the BLK-KNT? If lasers ever take a nerf, the "Meta-Knight" will lose favor. It's not a great peeker, or a particularly good brawler. It's a great mech to have behind a brawler as a "Force multiplier".

If you want a "Clan BLK", then run 5 or 6 MPL's with a big Targeting Computer. TC7+Range module pushes the range out to 396m (sound familiar?) and does similar damage with the same burn times for less total tonnage, so you can run it on smaller mechs. Try 4 or 5 MPL's with a size 5TC or higher on the Hunch-IIC and see what I mean.

[Alan Davion]

Tristan Winter, on 07 May 2016 - 11:47 AM, said:

1. Info warfare was a good idea, implemented poorly. PGI has a history of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. They've had some good ideas that were rejected far too early. Info warfare being one of them.

2. But yes, I also expect that Power Draw will be unpopular, at least initially. They need to do something though.

I agree with #1. The Info War PTS was supposed to help them sort all that stuff out, but the problem was they tried testing every facet of it all at once, without giving us any idea of how to actually do it. So your metaphor is actually surprisingly apt. If it weren't for that ridiculous ghost-range-laser-lock mechanic, the Info War PTS might have gone off a lot better.

As far as #2 though, I don't know if the power system will be implemented at all if the rumors around the forums are to be believed.

[Tristan Winter]

Alan Davion, on 07 May 2016 - 11:58 AM, said:

I agree with #1. The Info War PTS was supposed to help them sort all that stuff out, but the problem was they tried testing every facet of it all at once, without giving us any idea of how to actually do it. So your metaphor is actually surprisingly apt. If it weren't for that ridiculous ghost-range-laser-lock mechanic, the Info War PTS might have gone off a lot better.

Yes. And also, there were other issues. They tried to divide all mechs in each weight class according to role. Brawlers and damage-dealers received severe Infotech penalties, for example. Unfortunately, this resulted in the Firestarters and Jenners being given the same Infotech penalties as frickin Dire Wolves. A Firestarter was seen as having such great offense that they tried to compensate with Infotech penalties. As a result, you were basically trying to brawl without a working radar, because it took 5 seconds for your radar to detect a mech standing 100 meters in front of you. You could zig-zag between enemy mechs and they wouldn't even register on your radar, much less have a paper doll you could look at. I guess PGI figured they could get some role warfare going if every Firestarter had a friendly mech scouting their target for them. But their idea basically nerfed all the good light mechs into oblivion by blinding them.

Good idea, poorly implemented. Severe infotech penalties for light mechs was not the right call. For the Dire Wolf, it makes sense. For a Jenner? Not so much.

[smokefield]

as long as mechs have the armour and structure we have now, alphas are fine. ttk it is fine (1v1 from same weight class). dont expect the same ttk if you put a medium to fight an heavy or assault though...

[ScarecrowES]

There's a fundemental problem with trying to translate tabletop values to a real-time game. Every weapon on your mech in TT could be fired once per turn. Translating that directly to a real-time games means every weapon, with firing durations and cooldowns, could only be fired once every 6 seconds.

Now, that doesn't matter if you're talking about an AC/20, an SRM4, or a small laser. One shot every 6 seconds. Everything about the tabletop balancing of those weapons, how mechs were built... everything, was based around that fact. A medium laser was never going to be able to out-damage a large laser. You paid 4 times the weight to get double the oomph. And that difference, in tabletop, meant the difference between killing an enemy or leaving him alive to shoot back.

Think about what you get from MWO's version of these weapons. Your damage over time ratios go up the smaller your weapon is. You're getting better output from a medium laser than you are from the large laser. That's per one laser. Now consider you can take a bunch of the smaller lasers for the same weight of the larger one. Most mechs didn't make the trade from a single large weapon to several smaller weapons for a few other reasons.

First, the damage from larger weapons meant a LOT more with half the armor and internals in TT. That larger weapon, if it hit, was going to rip straight through your mech. And since every weapon had the same cooldown, those larger weapons meant they were the best way to get enough damage out there that maybe your opponent wasn't going to be getting up.

Second, the heat scale was smaller and had real penalties in TT. You weren't going to be able to take 5 medium lasers instead of a single large laser and expect that you'd actually be able to fire those things off at the same time and not have real consequences. You had a chance to shut down after firing only 4 mediums simultaneously from a state where you're carrying NO heat. By the time you got to 30 heat, the max, you had already likely incurred pilot damage, ammo explosions, movement penalties, and no less than 5 shutdown chances.

And despite all these differences, PGI basically maintains fairly close ties to the original TT stats for weapons. It lets you get away with things in MWO that you simply couldn't do in TT. Like mass a bunch of smaller lasers and just fire them repeatedly.

And honestly, massing a bunch of small lasers and firing them repeatedly in MWO is not necessarily the problem. You have to have this to make certain mechs even viable within the confines of THIS game. The problem is that it's handled in such a way that it treats all situations and mechs and builds exactly the same, even though they're clearly not - right down to their heat scales. Since PGI has deviated so far from many of the basic precepts of TT, it makes little sense to maintain some level of adherence for weapon stats. Or to not implement an additional system to compensate for situations where we really do NOT want to allow you to spam masses of powerful weapons over and over.

[Lances107]

Its not hard to see what problems come with Alpha strike, given certain builds, but I am not in favor of dumbing the game down because some do not want to think.

I put this solution in another thread, though lore wise it is a stretch, but it would solve the problem. Better yet it would not entail a complete overhaul of the game, which after listening to the last town hall, its clear they can not afford and keep this game going. This is my solution tag a Alpha Strike with a auto shutdown after you use it, a shut down that can not be overridden. Suddenly Alpha strike becomes tactical ability and not a spam ability. From a lore stand point the Alpha strikes pulls on everything the mech has to complete it, so in theory overloading the reactor as a result makes sense. As also said in another thread even if they solve the Alpha strike problem, they still have to deal with the Chain Firing problem with LRMS and ballistics.

[Gyrok]

Gas Guzzler, on 07 May 2016 - 11:44 AM, said:

Okay, putting our logic/realism hats on, that is completely ********. The DHS nerf was the smallest set back Clan mechs have seen to date, and was even partially offset by increased dissipation. Seriously, this is not the reason laser vomit clan mechs have fallen by the wayside.

The ER MLs don't have significant enough range advantage to counteract the laser duration anymore, that is the primary reason.

His point was regarding tonnage...my point was that it requires more and more tonnage to cool those lighter weapons with the DHS nerfs.

Novakaine, on 07 May 2016 - 11:50 AM, said:

Nope not in the slightest.
Clan weapons have the best of min and max ranges.
Except for the quirks on a few IS mechs.
Which was the reason you Clankers were crying about in FW.
Battlemasters ring a bell?
Of course they do.

Range has zero to do with duration, and if you think range is an issue...then you really should not be involved in the discussion because you do not understand the game or the mechanics behind current clan energy weapons.

Thanks for playing MWO.

[Gyrok]

GreenHell, on 07 May 2016 - 11:51 AM, said:

Clam ER-Larges have the same damage over 1.25s as the Pearl ER-Larges. They just burn for .25s longer to get that extra damage. Similar story with Clam LPL's, they do the same DoT but burn longer for more total damage. Makes sense to me honestly. Makes the two sides actually play and feel different. I don't want a game where both sides are exactly the same.

Inaccurate...

Consider:

IS LPL = 11 damage over 0.67 seconds = 1.64 damage per 1/10th second

CLPL = 13 damage over 1.12 seconds = 1.16 damage per 1/10th second

IS can fire 3 LPL w/o GH meaning you get 33 damage over 0.67 seconds for 4.92 damage per 1/10th second

Clans can fire 2 LPL w/o GH meaning you get 26 damage over 1.12 seconds for 2.32 damage per 1/10th second

Hmm...so for every 1/10th of a second that LPLs trade, the clan mech takes 5 damage and the IS mech takes 2. Seems fair, huh?

If you are going to try to make a mathematical point, at least test the math first.

Quote

As to the BLK-KNT? If lasers ever take a nerf, the "Meta-Knight" will lose favor. It's not a great peeker, or a particularly good brawler. It's a great mech to have behind a brawler as a "Force multiplier".

It is still the strongest heavy mech in the game after a mild nerf. I prefer to raise clans back up to be on the same level than to nerf everything to the ground.

Quote

If you want a "Clan BLK", then run 5 or 6 MPL's with a big Targeting Computer. TC7+Range module pushes the range out to 396m (sound familiar?) and does similar damage with the same burn times for less total tonnage, so you can run it on smaller mechs. Try 4 or 5 MPL's with a size 5TC or higher on the Hunch-IIC and see what I mean.

Not even remotely close...you give up overall range, beam duration, and raw damage to the LPL build, it really is not even in the same zip code as 3 LPL + 3 ML.

CMPLs have 70% fall off, so you do not get full double range like the IS LPLs, among a plethora of other issues.

Hence my point, range is not an issue, duration and damage per tick, specifically, are the issue.

Edited by Gyrok, 07 May 2016 - 12:56 PM.

[Triordinant]

It's wrong to look at each component (range, duration, projectile speed, weight, slots, etc.) of a 'mech in isolation because that's not how PGI "tries to balance". When they take from component A, they add to B (or so the theory goes). Not to mention other factors like hitboxes, max engine size, hardpoint location, Clan XLs not risking death from side torso destruction or Clan CASE in every location (not just torsos) at no cost in cbills, tonnage or slots.

PGI could've saved themselves a shitload of time, effort and money if everything was Clan vs Clan and IS vs IS.

Edited by Triordinant, 07 May 2016 - 01:23 PM.

[Tarl Cabot]

Energy alpha strikes - outstanding issues.

Long range energy weapons, weapons that draw lots of power off the engine, recycle too quickly + ability to fire multiple alphas before repositioning + no adverse heat effect til it hits 100% + ability energy weapons to hit the same mark, even when spread all over the chassis.

Base cooldown/duration much closer to current GR timers. Really differentiate cooldown between long range/heavy hitting energy weapons and med/close range weapons.

Heat Scale - at least 2 additional thresholds that would slow down a mech/agility in same matter as the current cXL engine movement penalty (which would be removed as a penalty) and have the thresholds marked off at 33%/66% on the HS, reducing mech speed by 20%-30%, and a second cooldown timer before the penalty is reduced after heat drops below the threshold.

Revamp the Ghost Heat from being a major heat after firing x amount of specific weapons to minor Ghost heat, based on all the weapons fired, each with its own percentage. Example 1GR +4ERML. The GR has little no heat, but the percentage would would act like if 4GR were fired (the trigger percentage). The ERML would equal 4 ERML but modified not as if 4 weapons + GH percentage but by 4 weapons heat with a percentage for 5 being fired.

cERML = 6 heat each. Each additional cERML generates its own 6 heat but the GH would hit it with a percentage increase, of say (again, example) 10%. Fire more than one weapon and the cERML heat would be 6+(0.6*x) weapons being fired.Fire just two cERLM = 12*10%=1.2. 6*2+1.2=13.2. Say the mech also fires two MG at the same time. Just for the 2 cERML their heat would be 6*2 + (0.6*4) - 14.4 instead of the current 12heat. Take that to the 7 cERML penalty mark. 6*7+(0.6*7) = 42+4.2 = 46.2 heat. The current penalty for firing 7 cERML is an additional 6.72 heat on top of the 42 base heat.

Bloom/CoF differential between hard point locations (unlikely to even be considered by PGI).

[Davers]

Tristan Winter, on 07 May 2016 - 11:29 AM, said:

For me, the big problem is that it makes MWO less of a multi-tasking challenge. Some people will say that min-maxing and boating is unavoidable, and that's a separate discussion, but when you combine boating with alpha strikes, you get a "thinking man's shooter" which is basically team deathmatch where you only need to use WASD and Mouse 1 button to win the game. One of the most fun parts of MWO, in my eyes, is the multi-tasking. Having a mech with 3-4 weapon groups, jump jets, consumables, MASC, ECM, and so many buttons to push. That's the fun part of MWO, for me.

But right now? Forget 4 different weapon groups, forget the methodical balancing act of firing different weapons at the same time. Just equip 3LPL and 4ML and smash Mouse 1 with your fist when you want to kill a robot.

Now, the way Russ is describing it, it sounds like they want to force players to use smaller weapon groups more often, and only use alpha strikes at certain moments. This adds a tiny bit of complexity. Not much, but it makes MWO different from most FPS games. It'll be interesting to see if the power draw system has any impact on boating as well.

I keep hearing in other threads that the power draw system isn't coming, so any discussion of it is kinda moot.

[Aetes Nakatomi]

Both sides have good reasons why alpha is better. Innersphere has the short burst laser fire and ppfld AC that work very well, the clans do have longer duration on the lasers but they have better range, tend to have much better hardpoints for boating and tend to have bigger engines that make the mech more maneuverable and thus easier to put that vomit into the right place (laser vomit crow and timber for example).

[Ultimax]

Tristan Winter, on 07 May 2016 - 11:29 AM, said:

For me, the big problem is that it makes MWO less of a multi-tasking challenge. Some people will say that min-maxing and boating is unavoidable, and that's a separate discussion, but when you combine boating with alpha strikes, you get a "thinking man's shooter" which is basically team deathmatch where you only need to use WASD and Mouse 1 button to win the game. One of the most fun parts of MWO, in my eyes, is the multi-tasking. Having a mech with 3-4 weapon groups, jump jets, consumables, MASC, ECM, and so many buttons to push. That's the fun part of MWO, for me.

The thinking parts are good positioning, movement, learning how to win trades, focus fire, prioritizing components/targets (requires strong build knowledge across all mechs).


What does "multi-tasking with lots of buttons" have to do with "thinking" in a shooter?

Shooters aren't about how many buttons you control, that's more of an MMO thing.




You're also reducing the game's controls a bit too much.

2 to 3 weapon groups is pretty normal (especially laser vomit builds, they tend to have MORE not LESS)
WASD
vision modes
2 consumables
DPI shift/cycle buttons
MASC
JJs
Throttle controls
Arm Lock

etc.

Edited by Ultimax, 07 May 2016 - 01:44 PM.

[Pjwned]

Convergence is why alpha strikes are an issue. Toning down convergence, especially by tying it to target locks and then actually implementing proper info warfare, would fix a lot of issues and we wouldn't need any nonsense ghost heat systems.

Arbitrarily nerfing laser vomit will just shift the meta back towards PPCs and then people will complain about that again and then lasers would get buffed again and then people would complain about laser vomit again...rinse and repeat.

[Gyrok]

Pjwned, on 07 May 2016 - 01:44 PM, said:

Convergence is why alpha strikes are an issue. Toning down convergence, especially by tying it to target locks and then actually implementing proper info warfare, would fix a lot of issues and we wouldn't need any nonsense ghost heat systems.

Arbitrarily nerfing laser vomit will just shift the meta back towards PPCs and then people will complain about that again and then lasers would get buffed again and then people would complain about laser vomit again...rinse and repeat.

Convergence is actually not the issue...

Convergence is only an issue if something like a HAG40 comes around, and is basically instant damage (not too likely).

As it stands, about the biggest convergence oriented alpha you have is 50 PPFLD, it takes a 90-100 ton mech to tote it onto the field, and while it stings to a single component, the DPS is atrocious compared to your average DPS build.

Additionally, anything that is not PPFLD can be spread via torso twist, except when the DoT application mechanic is so short that torso twist is no longer a viable mechanism for applying that damage to multiple locations. Which is what we are seeing right now with duration quirked laser vomit in IS mechs, especially when LPLs are involved.

EDIT: I stand corrected, IS can bring 60 PPFLD in a KGC/MAL with Double 20s and Double PPCs.

Edited by Gyrok, 07 May 2016 - 01:55 PM.

[Lozruet Gravemind]

Gyrok, on 07 May 2016 - 09:36 AM, said:

Why do you think alpha strikes are currently an issue?

What would you do to change them, and why?

My thoughts run to the issue being with the extremely short duration of IS lasers meaning mechs can put 58 damage onto a single component faster than someone can twist to spread that damage.

I think if the egregiously short burn duration was mitigated, it would become less painful to take a laser alpha. They *are* supposed to be DoT...the clan lasers are clearly nearly twice the burn time, why should IS lasers be half the burn for 90% of the damage?

Bottom line is that there is no proper "Heat Scale". As much as people are against many things from TT, the Heat Scale is what kept people from just loading 4-6 PPCs onto a mech there and firing every turn and just shutting down. When you penalize running high heat then people stagger the use of weapons. Of course you have to have some sort of extended cool down period or people would just boat short range/low heat weapons and alpha those.

Point is that there is no "Down side" to just Alphaing all day long. Doesnt matter what is done to change things as long as there is no Down side then people will keep Alphaing, or as much as the new system will allow, as much as they can.

Also the damage/heat on some weapons make the Alpha problem WORSE than it should be. Here the LPL is 11/7, you know what it is on TT? 9/10. The Clan LPL is 10/10 on TT as well not 13/10. So part of the issue with some weapons is they arnt doing the damage per heat they where originally designed for. With both LPLs your getting MORE damage then they have ever done, and with the IS for LESS heat to boot.

I personally think the LPL would STILL be used at 9/10 simply because of the .6 second duration. LL is 9/7 average range and burn time, ERLL is much better range so 1 point more heat and longer burn, LPL is a MUCH shorter burn time but MUCH hotter and shorter range. This gives all of them a niche to fill as opposes to LPL is highest damage least heat throw it on a quirked mech with modules and it murders all others.

Once again There are some things that just CANT translate from TT, the 10 second turn, but I dont fathom why people refuse to use ANY TT info as a starting point for a game based off those rules.

Edited by Lozruet Gravemind, 07 May 2016 - 01:58 PM.

[Ultimax]

Pjwned, on 07 May 2016 - 01:44 PM, said:

Convergence is why alpha strikes are an issue.

You will get destroyed in close range by SRM brawlers and they have pretty sizeable spread patterns when moving, how does that fit into your convergence theory?

[GorlockTheDestroyer]

Those who wait for the coming of RNGesus are fools. The issue of putting hits where you x-hair is(convergence) is not a problem.

The problem is the massive heat capacity. With this massive heatcap ghost heat cant even function properly.
Lower the existing heat capacity by a massive margin and the hope is things will begin to fall in place. Alpha strikes will have real consequences if the heatcap was much lower.

[wanderer]

Alpha strikes are an issue because they can and easily do end up punching into a single armor location.

A damage system transplanted from TT that relied on damage scattering across a target for decent TTK, mind you. While truly random damage to target would be absolute crap, there should at least be some locational deconvergence from the center pixel of your crosshairs when firing- something that would reduce how many weapons could hit a single location at the same time considerably without eliminating it entirely.