425 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MischiefSC, on 16 June 2016 - 08:15 PM, said:

So let me ask you this -

How many roles do you see? Be generous. Suppose you had spent the money to get a great coding team and we're willing to invest in IW as part of a role warfare approach to mech balance.

It honestly depends, I look at a game like Overwatch where there are a few roles, but how those characters achieve those roles are a bit different. For example Reaper, Tracer, and Genji are all flankers, but the circumstances in which you would use one over the other differs because each have their strengths and weaknesses, their "flavor" is what keeps them useful because they are distinct enough from each other and they play differently enough.

My problem with MWO is that mechs are much less distinct, things like ECM, MASC, and JJs are great at this but with customization as open as it is, mechs aren't necessarily forced into taking maybe the less optimal route. Honestly optimization is kind of the bane of diversity. If I had my choice, more equipment like ECM, MASC, and JJs would be included to help make mechs a little more distinct, the Cyclop's special equipment that's been hinted at is nice example and attempt, but imo it isn't enough.

MischiefSC, on 16 June 2016 - 08:15 PM, said:

In that context mech balance and roles can overlap but vary in flavor. So how would you break those roles up?

Really its play style, trying to ensure that everything is niche rather than trying to allow something to be too dominant or versatile (like mid-range wub in PUGs for example).

I know this is more abstract and not concrete enough details, but this is a rather complex topic, but its one that I've felt games like TF2 and Overwatch have done fairly well, but they also have spent more time and thought into how they want each character to fit into the overall puzzle, and that's really one of the main things that I feel like this game is lacking.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 June 2016 - 08:45 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

MischiefSC, on 16 June 2016 - 07:37 PM, said:

Well, the lasers and PPC are both pushing huge volumes of power down range. While a megawatt laser may not have a significant recoil a terawatt one would. Especially a 1 second long burn - that's a longer expression than any ballistic recoil would be.

PPCs are generating a discharge of a crap ton of force. Likely much more than a regular weather generated lightning given the 10 damage hit.

Lasers have an impulse but we don't notice them due to a relatively minimal amount of force and brief pulse. A 1 second long burn that will vaporize 9 pts worth or armor (vaporizing functionality 1,000 lbs of steel in 1 second!) is going to generate a recoil.

Terrawatt-scale is how high you need to go to get useful push from a laser on something as massive as a 'Mech, assuming we're talking about the force coming only from photons (expanding, super-heated air, on the other hand...). The spacecraft from James Cameron's Avatar actually received its initial push from earth via such lasers, and that's what the big mirrior was for on it. It would use matter/anti-matter rockets to slow. Reverse the process for the return ship. It's kind of neat, actually.

Also, the lasers in BT don't necessarily vaporize the armor. They could merely melt it or, more likely, drill through it, both of which require significantly less energy than sublimation or even evaporation.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MischiefSC, on 16 June 2016 - 08:15 PM, said:

I confess I'm mostly looking at this from a FW perspective. My inclination is to gently move QP into a Solaris concept and take FW to the next level. There's a lot of interest in a deep and engaging FW environment. While matches can be kept in the 10-30 minute ranges fights over planets should take days to a week and instead of counting clicks off a bar be measure in changing eengagements. Move from securing landing zones to clearing defenses to securing supply lines to clearing objectives, taking POI and culminating in a big day long invasion of the capital with scouting and raids in 4v4 and 8v8 being open the whole time to make the bigger objectives easier.

Add to this merc contracts open to both sides not for X days but specific phases of the campaign with set rewards for how fast/effective it's completed, etc.

Taking a planet should be a big deal and earn a cool decal and cockpit items akin to "campaign ribbons" for meeting certain performance metrics.

I have trouble looking at it from an FW perspective objectively because I really think FW should've never been done, let 3rd party leagues like NBT handle that stuff, because they are going to be better equipped to deal with things, all PGI needs to do is provide NBT the tools to ensure the gameplay side of things is engrossing (like non-crappy gamemodes for FW stuff and better private lobbies).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 June 2016 - 08:49 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 June 2016 - 08:47 PM, said:

I have trouble looking at it from an FW perspective objectively because I really think FW should've never been done, let 3rd party leagues like NBT handle that stuff, because they are going to be better equipped to deal with things, all PGI needs to do is provide NBT the tools to ensure the gameplay side of things is engrossing (like non-crappy gamemodes for FW stuff and better private lobbies).

I'm not thinking of FW like what we've been given. I'm thinking of a campaign system where the factions are complete entities unto themselves. Clans being very different from IS, players earning status in Clans by running lower value decks (like a bidding system but simpler) and IS having a sort of LP system giving you discounts on faction specific equipment and lower "maintenance costs" (higher per match pay) for using faction related mechs.

So suppose CJF is attacking a Steiner world. Would start with scout drops and pretty open map battles as Clans try to secure a safe drop zone for the invasion force. Enough wins in this and they can land X "dropship invasion locations". Attacker bases. More established zones, more open slots for more missions to take the planet. Wealthy enough units with their own dropships can even spend money and status to create their own invasion zone on a planet.

Okay. Getting off topic here because that's a page long post. Simple version picture "FW" being a campaign mode and players can either go along with the AI generated campaign progression or, if they're able, drive their own path on the invasion. Attack or Defend. Depending on population each faction may not always have their own open invasion campaign going - they may be concentrated on allied faction worlds, etc.

The other side of the game would be a Solaris environment. Unranked or ranked matches and maps based on the actual Solaris arenas as well as free-for-all environments, etc. 3 active tiers of tournaments, each with 2 tiers of competition for 6 total tournament "ranks", sorta like MRBC A-F. Then a tournament-less individual player ladder ranking.

This gives room for casuals and comp players both solo and as teams.

Independently it gives room for a huge galactic campaign for players to partake in either pugging in the AI driven part in 4v4, 8v8 and 12v12 environments, casual units doing the same all the way up to hardcore units controlling their own approach to attacking or defending worlds and indirectly competing with both the AI driven invasion and other player units doing the same.

So yeah. A deeper game universe isn't out of scope and as such mech balance within that concept is what I'm looking at. Ironically building the environment isn't as hard as the mech rebalance itself. The fundamentals of the campaign and Solaris environment are already in the mission builder for cryengine so I understand. It's man hours is producing and testing but not outside the scope of what people do in making mods.

Mech balance though is a harder concept to tackle.

[Egg Fu]

As a fairly new player I'm quite happy with the TTK just as it is now even after playing all class sizes of mechs.

IMO if they end up making it harder to aim then that's not really going to bode well with new players and the retention there of.

If indeed some of you are successful at increasing TTK in this game would that mean I'm going to run out of ammo so fast that I'll need to downgrade my engine just to afford the tonnage to carry more ammo? Hopefully they'd just do something like make each ton of ammo hold double the rounds or some such?

As far as bouncing around moving at speed while firing the M1 Abrams main battle tank is still deadly accurate and that's just with today's technology. I could only imagine tech is a lot better during the timeline of this here game.

[Egg Fu]

Gyro Stabilizers are amazing.

[Hotthedd]

Pjwned, on 16 June 2016 - 11:55 AM, said:

2. There aren't many suggestions on how somebody can mitigate cone of fire, and the ones that are given are for the most part bad or not that great.

I know some people like the idea of better aim when not moving, but I think it's a really terrible idea to reward people for sitting on their *** camping 1 spot (more than they already do) while punishing the people that actually move and try to do something, and then of course we have to acknowledge that such a system impacts fast mechs (i.e lights) more than it does slow(er) mechs (i.e heavies & assaults) and I don't think we need more biases against lights.

Some (other?) people have suggested mech heat levels affecting cone of fire which could be kind of decent I guess, but I'm not wild about it because I don't really think it makes a whole lot of sense and it also requires the whole heat system to be revised, which does need to happen at some point but it makes things a lot more complicated; there is a solid basis for heat levels affecting aim in the Battletech source material though so that makes it something to not just disregard completely.

I'm not really aware of any other ideas (good or bad) to mitigate cone of fire aside from some arbitrary BS like making it based on damage potential of a volley, so if somebody wants to throw something out for me then you can but I probably still won't like it very much because I don't really like cone of fire.

Anyways, I don't see much in favor of cone of fire because I don't think it's a very good system in the first place and I can't think of any particularly good ways to let players mitigate cone of fire (managing heat levels being the best I can think of, which I'm not wild about), but when it comes to (the idea of) a lock-based convergence system all I can really see is positives (even if it may not be all positives in practice) so I think that's what should happen.

As far as movement affecting precision, (and affecting lights more) this is where PGI can take a page from TT. Movement aim penalties are not based on speed (which negatively effects lights more) but on stationary/walking/running. A lighter mech "walks" at a faster speed than an assault, so accuracy penalties would scale.

The problem is not alphas or group fire per se, but the perfect precision of them under all circumstances. That is why I favor reticle bloom scaling with the # of weapons simultaneously fired, instead of arbitrarily assigning a potential damage threshold. Firing one AC/20 should be precise, making it a weapon to be feared, but firing 3 LPLs should be less precise, and 6 MLs should have a very good chance of spreading damage.

That way precision is in the hands of the pilot. One can choose raw damage OR pinpoint accuracy, but not both. It also gives the bigger, heavier, less ammo/ton weapons a greater fear factor than massed small weapons (that right now can deal better pinpoint damage). It is also compatible with real world physics, and would increase TTK without having to sacrifice aiming skill.

[Johnny Z]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 June 2016 - 08:43 PM, said:

It honestly depends, I look at a game like Overwatch where there are a few roles, but how those characters achieve those roles are a bit different. For example Reaper, Tracer, and Genji are all flankers, but the circumstances in which you would use one over the other differs because each have their strengths and weaknesses, their "flavor" is what keeps them useful because they are distinct enough from each other and they play differently enough.

My problem with MWO is that mechs are much less distinct, things like ECM, MASC, and JJs are great at this but with customization as open as it is, mechs aren't necessarily forced into taking maybe the less optimal route. Honestly optimization is kind of the bane of diversity. If I had my choice, more equipment like ECM, MASC, and JJs would be included to help make mechs a little more distinct, the Cyclop's special equipment that's been hinted at is nice example and attempt, but imo it isn't enough.


Really its play style, trying to ensure that everything is niche rather than trying to allow something to be too dominant or versatile (like mid-range wub in PUGs for example).

I know this is more abstract and not concrete enough details, but this is a rather complex topic, but its one that I've felt games like TF2 and Overwatch have done fairly well, but they also have spent more time and thought into how they want each character to fit into the overall puzzle, and that's really one of the main things that I feel like this game is lacking.

Overwatch game play is childs play compared to MechWarrior game play. No offense, it just is. MW has more of a sim aspect. Really. MechWarrior players decide what role, and potential roles they have for each mech, not the designers, and is dynamic, not static.

Anyway what Overwatch, Dirty Bomb, Team Fortress 2, Lawbreakers, Battleborn, and the other 10 games out or coming like that do have is character. They have spent time on adding characters to their game, meanwhile MechWarrior hasn't even begun. +1 for NPC's.

I should add, that's why I don't like those games. Players are playing NPC's(None player characters). Why would players want to play NPC's? Doesnt make sense. As a player I prefer to play a player character. Thank you very much. Not one decided by some designer control freak. That Mechwarrior hasn't added player characters yet is another topic all together.... I wont go on a rant about that right now. With herculean effort I will press save changes instead. ... ...

Edited by Johnny Z, 17 June 2016 - 06:29 AM.

[InspectorG]

MischiefSC, on 16 June 2016 - 07:03 PM, said:

Carving out a space for mechs isn't as hard. A really easy solution is making flexibility in construction a mech by mech factor so "bad" stock mechs have a bit more flexibility in modification.

Also a better weapon balance format helps a great deal.



Quirks are not balance. I'm looking at "quirks" as self-evident things like hardpoint inflation and obvious performance metrics rather than weapon performance % modifiers and structure bonuses.

I should say "maintenance cost" instead of R&R and say it would be exclusive to FW play.

The idea being that some mechs are more or less expensive to deploy than others and that faction specific mechs are more cost effective to run than others.

So, for example, playing for Kurita and running a Dragon you'll likely make more / match than running a Cataphract.

Not QP or the like but as a facet of FW logistics system. A unit could invest in quality engineering teams and dropships with mech repair bays for a higher per-match profit for members, etc.

Ill do you one better for FW.

Leave the mechs 'unbalanced'. Put them in 4 teirs. Like T1 is all the super top performers. T4 is the bads. T5 is STOCK builds.

Now, put a cooldown timer on T1-T3 so that a T1 mech can only be used once every 2 days or so.
T2 once, per day.
T3+ unlimited.
T5 nets large cbill/MC bonus as farming mechs.

Put a large cost to drop large high level units.

Less skilled/casual Units cost way less.

Big skill units have to weigh cost of dropping all best pilots for major-must-win pushes vs maybe distributing the better leaders out into the playerbase to lead the casuals.

Implement a R&R mechanic.

Holding a planet nets you resources that either:
A. mitigate R&R
B. can be used to fortify planet
C. Alter cooldown timers for T1 mechs.

SCOUT mode is not about artillery but opens up drop lanes for invasiosn and cuts them off for planetary defense.

[Mystere]

Johnny Z, on 17 June 2016 - 06:08 AM, said:

Overwatch game play is childs play compared to MechWarrior game play. No offense, it just is. MW has more of a sim aspect. Really. MechWarrior players decide what role, and potential roles they have for each mech, not the designers, and is dynamic, not static.

Unfortunately, as these 17 pages (and counting) and other previous threads have shown, there seems to be stiff resistance in making MWO more sim-like. People do not seem to realize that weapons accuracy and precision are modeled via probability theory (among other things). Why else would some misrepresent -- or worse actually think -- that RNGs in MWO will result in shots going 90 degrees from line of fire?

Also, how compatible are sims with eSports?

[Bishop Steiner]

Mystere, on 17 June 2016 - 07:01 AM, said:

Unfortunately, as these 17 pages (and counting) and other previous threads have shown, there seems to be stiff resistance in making MWO more sim-like. People do not seem to realize that weapons accuracy and precision are modeled via probability theory (among other things). Why else would some misrepresent -- or worse actually think -- that RNGs in MWO will result in shots going 90 degrees from line of fire?

Also, how compatible are sims with eSports?

what's more boggling to me...is somehow Esports seem to view actual Sims as less skill intensive that run n gun shooters?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mystere, on 17 June 2016 - 07:01 AM, said:

Also, how compatible are sims with eSports?

They really aren't, the slower the gameplay the less attention its going to draw. It's kinda like comparing Golf to American Football or Basketball, one is just naturally going to attract more people because of the pace of the game even if both involve equal level of skill, that's just how it is. Obviously there is more involved than just that, but that is the main thing at least for me.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 17 June 2016 - 07:24 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Johnny Z, on 17 June 2016 - 06:08 AM, said:

Overwatch game play is childs play compared to MechWarrior game play. No offense, it just is. MW has more of a sim aspect. Really. MechWarrior players decide what role, and potential roles they have for each mech, not the designers, and is dynamic, not static.

Players decide what role they will play, but it doesn't mean that they pick the right role or mech for the job, which is part of the problem, because customization can hurt diversity and depth of the meta very easily. So sorry, I don't care what you think, but the allure of many of the mechs is their intended role (like Whammys being PPC tanks), not being able to customize it into a dakka-hammer.

Also, just because a game is not "sim" enough doesn't make it more childish, that's a false equivalency.

Johnny Z, on 17 June 2016 - 06:08 AM, said:

As a player I prefer to play a player character.

You are using the wrong words. Whatever character you are using is a PC, regardless of whether they come with predefined personality or not, which is what you are really after, which is cool, but it doesn't allow you to drop hints about the lore behind it or create more interesting interactions between characters, which is what I find more interesting.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 17 June 2016 - 07:45 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 17 June 2016 - 07:24 AM, said:

They really aren't, the slower the gameplay the less attention its going to draw. It's kinda like comparing Golf to American Football or Basketball, one is just naturally going to attract more people because of the pace of the game even if both involve equal level of skill, that's just how it is. Obviously there is more involved than just that, but that is the main thing at least for me.

Sims are High Skill Cap AND High Skill Floor.

Most Esport Games may indeed have a decently high skill cap (though at some point a lot of shooters do devolve to better rig, better reflexes being the tie breaker, and I get real tired of reflexes being referrred to as a skill, tbh), but tend to have comparatively low skill floors.

Aka they are popular because they are easy to learn the basics and get started. The masses pick Generic Warplane Game Shooter A over Microsoft Combat Flight Sim because in one night you can be actualyl playing the game and having fun, pretending you are an Uber Pilot slaying Ratzis, Mujahadin, Soviets, etc...... whereas with the Flight Sim, you have a massive investment in hardware, and 2 weeks in you are still trying to learn how to take off without killing yourself, let alone dealing with midair stalls, etc.

Same reason that generally speaking the more a Movie or TV Show asks a person to actually THINK, the less likely it is to get popular....where as we have a never ending glut of Survivor and American Idol clones.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 June 2016 - 07:45 AM.

[SteamCharts Kerensky]

Let's dwell in reality here.

Your average professional Counter Strike player would be very good at Mechwarrior Online if you gave him a properly equipped mech with skill mastery.

Your average 'professional' Mechwarrior player would be lucky to keep a 1:1 K:D on public Counter Strike servers.

That's why I like playing Mechwarrior Online. I don't have to be good or skilled at shooters to clown on people.

[Johnny Z]

SteamCharts Kerensky, on 17 June 2016 - 07:47 AM, said:

Let's dwell in reality here.

Your average professional Counter Strike player would be very good at Mechwarrior Online if you gave him a properly equipped mech with skill mastery.

Your average 'professional' Mechwarrior player would be lucky to keep a 1:1 K:D on public Counter Strike servers.

That's why I like playing Mechwarrior Online. I don't have to be good or skilled at shooters to clown on people.

Get real.

I just complained about a botter who was using a bot 100% and he was having a heck of a time driving his mech to keep the bot on target. It was funny to watch actually.

Using a bot or wall hack doesn't = skill

A cs player would get owned in this game for quite a while in tier 1 with the best most cheesy mech. Period.

As for Mechwarior players playing cs its no challenge except learning the maps.

I fully expect when all is said and done MechWarrior Online will be the most hated game ever by the cheating brigade.

Edited by Johnny Z, 17 June 2016 - 07:58 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 June 2016 - 07:44 AM, said:

I get real tired of reflexes being referrred to as a skill, tbh)

Well it is a skill, even if it isn't applied in a more useful manor.

Bishop Steiner, on 17 June 2016 - 07:44 AM, said:

The masses pick Generic Warplane Game Shooter A over Microsoft Combat Flight Sim because in one night you can be actualyl playing the game and having fun

You pretty much explained why eSports are not going to involve sims with this one statement, in one night I can actually have fun, which is typically why we all play games. If it takes 2 weeks for me to actually be enjoying myself, I probably won't play that "game".

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 17 June 2016 - 07:53 AM, said:

Well it is a skill, even if it isn't applied in a more useful manor.


You pretty much explained why eSports are not going to involve sims with this one statement, in one night I can actually have fun, which is typically why we all play games. If it takes 2 weeks for me to actually be enjoying myself, I probably won't play that "game".

Yup, I don't deny it. The irony being that the GitGud crowd gravitates to those games because they are easier to start playing and "have fun"...then want to crap all over people who actualyl simply play video games FOR FUN.

It's like meeting up with a bunch of "friends" to play volleyball at the beach. Some get offended that not everyone are playing breakneck, take no prisoners uber death match Volleyball, and are only happy when spiking the ball in their "friends" face. And are offended to be on the same court with people who want to try to play, and play by the rules, but just aren't that good, for any number of reasons.

If you wan't only "pro play", join a private league. But what pisses me off is people showing up for a pickup game, and then treating the other players like crap because they are just there to have fun on their weeekend.

As for reflexes, they can be trained to some degree, yes, but it's more of a talent than a skill. A person with inherently bad reflexes can never through practice obtain lightning reflexes. The skill in most sports is learning the mechanics and tuning those to enhance or compensate for one's natural talents.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 17 June 2016 - 08:02 AM.

[SteamCharts Kerensky]

Johnny Z, on 17 June 2016 - 07:53 AM, said:

Get real.

I am real. That's why I'm undefeated in the scouting queue and have great scores across the board in all game modes.

I play MWO because it is easy, not because it is skillful. That's the same reason I play Overwatch instead of Quake Live.

[Trauglodyte]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 17 June 2016 - 07:24 AM, said:

They really aren't, the slower the gameplay the less attention its going to draw. It's kinda like comparing Golf to American Football or Basketball, one is just naturally going to attract more people because of the pace of the game even if both involve equal level of skill, that's just how it is. Obviously there is more involved than just that, but that is the main thing at least for me.

I've watched a lot of the MRBC and have watched a lot of the World Championship games leading up to the actual quarter finals and such. There are a lot of teams in the qualifying games that have no real business being there, which we all expected. But, there isn't a lot of excitement watching two "poke" teams sitting across Canyon Network hitting each other with Large Lasers. The only time it gets exciting is when it is a brawl match and the skill you see there is choosing where and when to brawl, the approach vector you take to your targets, and the easy but seemingly extremely difficult task of focus firing on called targets - the qualifying matches have SCREAMED how bad people are about focusing.

I think that MW:O could use some semblance of sim that wouldn't ruin the esport aspect. Yes, esports are an ADD/ADHD type of thing. Yet, people watch Hearthstone which boils down to the same 6-7 decks and the skill is limited to really only trying to figure out how you're going to manage the game given the RNG aspect of what cards you get when. The regional stuff is something like 3-4 global regions witch each taking 3-4 days to complete at 6-ish hours a day. How would slowing combat down just a little be bad when Hearthstone is mind numblingly boring just watching people play Bridge with minions/spells? Btw, that question isn't inflammatory but an actual honest question.