84 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

oneda, on 26 July 2016 - 05:05 AM, said:

Brawling is easy.

I can't believe I missed this comment, if brawling were easy, everyone would be good at it, but it requires much faster thinking in regards to positioning (making sure lights aren't able to core out your rear easy), good twisting/piloting, and a bit more twitch skill so it is not necessarily easy.

[Trauglodyte]

Darian DelFord, on 26 July 2016 - 04:50 AM, said:

I remember them having a reason but I can not remember what it was.

Had a match the other day in my Jenner D... I am testing out the 4 SPL and 2 SRM 4 build now with the new adjustments....

Played on Frozen City... and I literally had to wait 7 minutes before the firs mechs actually moved into brawling range. Both sides were literally hiding behind buildings shooting each other at 800 some odd meters. I dared not cross without back up as i knew I would have been toast.

It got me to thinking... why the hell do we have weapon range fall off? To me I think this is one of the worst decisions they made. If it was put back to the way it was... it would actually bring brawling back and get rid of this damn peek-a-boo games we have now.

I dunno...l just could not remember why they changed it.

The questions that you should be asking are:

• Does it make sense to have SRMs locked in at 270m? You could argue missiles have safeties on but they're not guided so why? You could argue that kinetic damage is still plausible even with safeties engaged.
  
• More importantly, why is extended range so far?

[Troutmonkey]

Darian DelFord, on 26 July 2016 - 08:10 AM, said:

If nothing else... change it from 2x's to 1.5 or something.

Pretty sure IS lasers are +100% and Clans are +50% for max range already. Ballistics were also recent brought back in line from +200% to +100% for everything except Gauss
CERLLs were way worse when they were first released

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

Troutmonkey, on 26 July 2016 - 06:19 PM, said:

Pretty sure IS lasers are +100% and Clans are +50% for max range already. Ballistics were also recent brought back in line from +200% to +100% for everything except Gauss
CERLLs were way worse when they were first released

Only small and medium class clan lasers are +50%. The large class are still 100%.

[Kubernetes]

ACs' damage dropoff really doesn't make any sense at all as it stands. How does an AC20 round do .1 damage at 539M? Is it a cannon shell fired by Wile E. Coyote and the explosive filler is spilling out as flies downrange? Even if the damage has some kinetic component, a cannon shell should not be doing .1 damage. But hey, I guess this is the future.

/edit Heck, almost none of the weapons make sense. Why do missiles just self-destruct at 1001M and 271M? Why? Who would design a missile that way? Why do lasers do constant damage out to optimal range and then suffer a linear dropoff? Wouldn't a laser exhibit linear dropoff from the muzzle? What happens to those charged PPC particles between 0 and 90 meters? It just flows through you? What kind of machine gun can only reach out to 240M? If you think about it, thirty-first century troops would have been rocked by a WWII-era army.

Edited by Kubernetes, 27 July 2016 - 12:16 AM.

[Lykaon]

oneda, on 26 July 2016 - 05:05 AM, said:

How can even a single player dislike sniping. The art of long range trading while not getting hit is so much fun. I love sniper wars. My best builds and loadouts and mechs are optimized to be lethal snipers. All the time ppl complain about sniping haha. Damn. Its the best part about mwo. Brawling is easy. Being a good sniper requires real skills.

Yep you need

ECM
Advanced zoom
Pinpoint high velocity weapon
Basic map knowledge

[Megameatloaf]

I have not played much since back around open beta so take the following opinion with a grain of salt.

But coming back to the game a few weeks ago the biggest problem I seem to find is that most of the mid-range/sniper mechs seem to be only marginally worse in a brawl then a brawling mech. Take the ERPPC for example, it works point blank and it works out at 800m. But a large pulse laser or an LB 10-x start to become ineffective beyond 400m-ish.

If I get caught at range due to map type or whatever... I'm useless. But if when and if I catch them up close for a brawl, instead of ripping through them as a brawling mech would except, I come out of the fight with 45% damage and missing arm or two.

Honestly I wouldn't mind seeing more minimum range on some of the long range focused weaponry. I feel like that would give people a good incentive to play brawlers again.

But heck... I'm just talking out of my arse here. I've probably missed something essential, let me know if I have!

[Pjwned]

Megameatloaf, on 27 July 2016 - 12:31 AM, said:

I have not played much since back around open beta so take the following opinion with a grain of salt.

But coming back to the game a few weeks ago the biggest problem I seem to find is that most of the mid-range/sniper mechs seem to be only marginally worse in a brawl then a brawling mech. Take the ERPPC for example, it works point blank and it works out at 800m. But a large pulse laser or an LB 10-x start to become ineffective beyond 400m-ish.

If I get caught at range due to map type or whatever... I'm useless. But if when and if I catch them up close for a brawl, instead of ripping through them as a brawling mech would except, I come out of the fight with 45% damage and missing arm or two.

Honestly I wouldn't mind seeing more minimum range on some of the long range focused weaponry. I feel like that would give people a good incentive to play brawlers again.

But heck... I'm just talking out of my arse here. I've probably missed something essential, let me know if I have!

The problem there is brawling weapons not being good enough, not that long range weapons are too good at brawling; I also find it hilarious that somebody complains about the brawling potential of an ER PPC as if it has any sustainability in brawling range due to its massive heat.

SRMs do bad damage for all the disadvantages they have, SSRMs are trash period on top of doing bad damage, machine guns are bad, medium and small (pulse) lasers are both 1 heat higher than they should be, LB-X cannons are just horrible because they don't even do their job of crit seeking properly, and flamers while now actually kind of decent (finally, after 4 years) no longer do any mech damage that's worth considering.

I think that's about it. One of the actually only good brawling weapons out there is the AC20 with its very respectable DPS and obvious hole punching capability, but then everything else has either always been bad or suffers from ancient nerfs (read: SRMs and medium & small lasers and machine guns) and it needs to be ****ing fixed finally but PGI are incompetent hacks and they can't adjust XML files to save their lives.

[Lehmund]

Darian DelFord, on 26 July 2016 - 05:08 AM, said:

Attempt to play a knife fighting light. In todays MWO..... it is'nt easy.

Just curious though as to why they changed it... can't remember.



Aye weapons used to have hard caps... for a Medium Laser... It was 250ish I think... after that NO damage. They then extended the range with fall of damage after the optimal range. I just can't remember their justification for it.

Honestly I think it was one of the worse weapon balance decisions they ever made.

The whole mechanic allows for players to trade less damage for the same amount of heat if you're farther than your optimal range on most weapons. Since in the heat of battle, you can't always see precisely the range of things in Meters all the time while dodging, it allows pilots to do at least some damage.

I like it and makes sense for things like Lasers and Ballistics. Missiles having hard ranges make sense too (missile fuel limitations etc..).

Though some snipers still snipe beyond their optimal range, it quickly gets inefficient unless you are using Gauss Rifles.....

[Wintersdark]

Kubernetes, on 27 July 2016 - 12:04 AM, said:

ACs' damage dropoff really doesn't make any sense at all as it stands. How does an AC20 round do .1 damage at 539M? Is it a cannon shell fired by Wile E. Coyote and the explosive filler is spilling out as flies downrange? Even if the damage has some kinetic component, a cannon shell should not be doing .1 damage. But hey, I guess this is the future.

Presumably because they are wholly kinetic rounds?

Quote

/edit Heck, almost none of the weapons make sense. Why do missiles just self-destruct at 1001M and 271M? Why? Who would design a missile that way? Why do lasers do constant damage out to optimal range and then suffer a linear dropoff? Wouldn't a laser exhibit linear dropoff from the muzzle? What happens to those charged PPC particles between 0 and 90 meters? It just flows through you? What kind of machine gun can only reach out to 240M? If you think about it, thirty-first century troops would have been rocked by a WWII-era army.

Missiles just self destruct visibly so you can see where they ended, I guess. Gameplay thing. Missiles having a hard range is reasonable though, because they are rockets, not airplanes. The thing with rockets is that they tend to wholly lose guidance and generally no longer even follow a ballistic path once unpowered; they tumble due to uneven mass distribution. Play KSP for a while and see how easy atmospheric travel is with rockets when you shut off engines

A unpowered rocket could well lose it's ability to detonate when it should, and would be unable to control it's orientation to properly deliver a payload.

Lots of reasons, really, for missiles to have hard range caps.

Autocannon rounds, though, consider: 7 AC20 rounds weighs in at 1000kg. Each shell, therefor, is some 140kg; even accounting for mass in the propellant and such, there's a LOT of mass being flung out of your mech at ~1400km/h. That's a LOT of kinetic energy, not a minor kinetic component.

[Kubernetes]

Wintersdark, on 27 July 2016 - 11:11 AM, said:

Presumably because they are wholly kinetic rounds?

That's only Gauss. The name auto-CANNON suggests it fires explosive shells. The AC20 flies at a whopping 540m/s. All kinetic?

And yes, I know that all the wonky weapons physics exist solely for gameplay. Any attempt to compare MWO weapons to real world counterparts reveals just how absurd the former really are.

[Baulven]

In the case of most modern missiles for air to air purposes they disarm after maximum flight to minimize civilian casualties. SRMs are actually rockets since they have no guidance and could either be set to detonate on impact or explode at a set time (aka distance) from launch. But then we are getting into real world not BT mechanics.

[Wintersdark]

Kubernetes, on 27 July 2016 - 11:38 AM, said:

That's only Gauss. The name auto-CANNON suggests it fires explosive shells. The AC20 flies at a whopping 540m/s. All kinetic?

And yes, I know that all the wonky weapons physics exist solely for gameplay. Any attempt to compare MWO weapons to real world counterparts reveals just how absurd the former really are.

A "whopping" 540 m/s = 540*360/1000 = 1944 km/h. 1 AC20 round = 142.8kg. Lets say roughly 2/3rds in the shell itself, and call it 95kg.

That's 13,851,000 joules of kinetic energy in a small shell that's going to be stopping in a short distance (mech armor cannot be very thick. Even assuming it was stopping in 1m, that would be 13,851kN of force. That's a TREMENDOUS impact.

[Brain Cancer]

Quote

Autocannon rounds, though, consider: 7 AC20 rounds weighs in at 1000kg. Each shell, therefor, is some 140kg; even accounting for mass in the propellant and such, there's a LOT of mass being flung out of your mech at ~1400km/h. That's a LOT of kinetic energy, not a minor kinetic component.

MWO screws this up badly- each single "shot" is actually multiple shells in a cassette fired as a burst of 3 to dozens depending on shell size and the AC's damage rating.

Victors have a 100mm gun that fires massive numbers of shells, while by comparison a stock Marauder has a 120mm gun that fires three shells per shot. The Victor has an AC/20 and the Marauder an AC/5. Instead, MWO makes the whole deal a single shell where in game, it should actually be more like laser mechanics.

[Stone Wall]

Darian DelFord, on 26 July 2016 - 05:08 AM, said:

Attempt to play a knife fighting light. In todays MWO..... it is'nt easy.

Just curious though as to why they changed it... can't remember.



Aye weapons used to have hard caps... for a Medium Laser... It was 250ish I think... after that NO damage. They then extended the range with fall of damage after the optimal range. I just can't remember their justification for it.

Honestly I think it was one of the worse weapon balance decisions they ever made.

It is a horrible game design decision.

And about your match experience, ugh. I know what you mean. Is this Hide and Seek Warrior or Sniper Warrior because people seem to be confused as to what this game is.

Darian DelFord, on 26 July 2016 - 10:22 AM, said:

People keep saying it would be a horrible idea... it would destroy game play........

Yet we had it and at the time the player base was up in arms when they increased the damage ranges.....

Like I said I just am trying to remember why it was changed....

Honestly the battles were much better back then... and that is one of the reasons why.

Another reason why I loved MW3.

Edited by Stone Wall, 27 July 2016 - 01:20 PM.

[Kubernetes]

Wintersdark, on 27 July 2016 - 11:55 AM, said:

A "whopping" 540 m/s = 540*360/1000 = 1944 km/h. 1 AC20 round = 142.8kg. Lets say roughly 2/3rds in the shell itself, and call it 95kg.

That's 13,851,000 joules of kinetic energy in a small shell that's going to be stopping in a short distance (mech armor cannot be very thick. Even assuming it was stopping in 1m, that would be 13,851kN of force. That's a TREMENDOUS impact.

Gauss rounds are 10/ton. Gauss flies at 2000m/s. If AC20 is all kinetic, the Gauss should be doing significantly more damage than the AC20.

Edited by Kubernetes, 27 July 2016 - 02:42 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Kubernetes, on 27 July 2016 - 02:41 PM, said:

Gauss rounds are 10/ton. Gauss flies at 2000m/s. If AC20 is all kinetic, the Gauss should be doing significantly more damage than the AC20.

but for game balance.

And of course that trying to apply real world physics to Battletech weapons is a good errand anyways.

Maybe Gauss rounds have more mass in casing or what have you, accounting for how the smaller and weapon accelerates a Gauss round to such high speeds?

*Shrugs*

You'd expect the Gauss projectile to have significantly less mass given the relative velocities.

Ultimately game balance wins any contest here though.

[Damocles]

It felt like Mechwarrior back when this was in. You could dance in and out of your opponents effective ranges in a brawl and manage heat (SHS only at the time) and try to control the flow of battle.

IIRC the change came with larger maps, and IMO the issue IS the maps that were designed.

RE: x+1 no dmg being..."unbelievable." Well, we have space-aged unfathomable armor vs. weapons that can defeat it only until X range, past this point=armor victory.

[Mystere]

Stone Wall, on 27 July 2016 - 01:21 PM, said:

And about your match experience, ugh. I know what you mean. Is this Hide and Seek Warrior or Sniper Warrior because people seem to be confused as to what this game is.

As I keep saying, if you see such things happening, just "Banzai!" into the enemy and drop into a new fight. There is no point in frustrating one's self waiting out till then end.

[Mystere]

Kubernetes, on 27 July 2016 - 02:41 PM, said:

Gauss rounds are 10/ton. Gauss flies at 2000m/s. If AC20 is all kinetic, the Gauss should be doing significantly more damage than the AC20.

Just think of the sabot as having significant weight and do the math backwards. <shrugs>