84 replies to this topic

[Darian DelFord]

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.

[ScarecrowES]

How does adding unlimited range to weapons LESSEN peek play and INCREASE brawling? You'd figure it'd do the opposite.

[GreyNovember]

Imagine if your small laser reached all the way across the map. Or if your short ranged missiles could travel kilometers on end.

[LowSubmarino]

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.

[Baulven]

I think he means that weapons should be hard ranged. Max range would be extent and no damage beyond that number. Nevermind how much that would make knife fighting terrible.

[Bud Crue]

OP did not propose unlimited range. He is asking why we have fall off (the tapering effect rather than a hard limit).

[Darian DelFord]

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.

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.

Edited by Darian DelFord, 26 July 2016 - 05:09 AM.

[ScarecrowES]

Bud Crue, on 26 July 2016 - 05:07 AM, said:

OP did not propose unlimited range. He is asking why we have fall off (the tapering effect rather than a hard limit).

Makes a bit more sense to ask, but not much. Hard limits on all weapons would be horrible. The few hard limits we already have are already ridiculous.

[Bud Crue]

Just did some searching back to 2012, and even then the range drop off was a thing. So if hard caps were once a thing it must have been quite early in development. As to why they changed I could find nothing.

http://mwomercs.com/...s-excel-inside/
http://mwomercs.com/...ffective-range/

Edited by Bud Crue, 26 July 2016 - 05:20 AM.

[Wintersdark]

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

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.

We've always had falloff, or at least since I started in November 2012.

But I ask: how do you feel hard limits would improve things, other than making brawling even harder?

Hard limits are silly. Consider the AC20. With a range of 270m, I can hammer you for 20 damage there. Step one meter further away, and I still hit for 19.something damage. With hard limits, that AC20 projectile would suddenly lose all its energy and become useless at 271m. How does that make any sense or provide better gameplay?

It'd just make short ranged weapons worse.

[Pjwned]

Imagine how annoying it is when somebody fires their PPC at a target only 89m away, and it does no damage.

Then try to imagine pretty much that same effect happening to every single weapon except 1,000x more irritating. Oh you fired your AC20 at a target 271m away? LOL NO DAMAGE GIT GUD SCRUB LOL.

At least in TT you had accuracy penalties for firing at long range (rather than the weapon being guaranteed to do do no damage) and you didn't have targets moving around in real time so you could take that shot knowing the enemy mech would be in the same hex rather than OOPS LOL MOVED 1 METER AWAY NO DAMAGE LOL LE AYY LMAO LOL; removing the falloff range would be a catastrophic nightmare for this game.

I know that SRMs (and LRMs, but they have really long range) already deal with this hard range cap and people do use SRMs, but SRMs are also used far less than they should be and people often post about how they'd rather take a couple medium lasers or something over a SRM4 (which is a problem that needs to be addressed) and honestly the hard range cap on missiles is partly why.

The current system we have now is the best for this game, and if you don't like it because you had a crappy match in your brawling range mech then tough **** because the alternatives are far worse. I'm also going to assume that game of waiting 7 minutes took place in Skirmish mode, because otherwise there would have easily been an objective to go after instead of sitting around, and that is a problem with Skirmish mode, not with weapon ranges.

[Angel of Annihilation]

ScarecrowES, on 26 July 2016 - 04:59 AM, said:

How does adding unlimited range to weapons LESSEN peek play and INCREASE brawling? You'd figure it'd do the opposite.

He is talking about reducing the weapons ranges so that the max range of the weapon is the max range, no partial damage for shots outside the max range.

[jss78]

Yeah, hard limits are kind of aggravating and counter-intuitive. IMO some priority should be given removing the existing hard-limit mechanisms ....

PPC's should have a damage dropoff within 90 m.

I hope the InfoWar^TM will find a way to remove the "perfect sensors at 800 m, zero sensors at 801 m" mechanic too. Something like a target-information delay which depends on the cumulative effect of sensor strength, range, radar profile of the target.

What the damage dropoff does in this game is give lasers and ballistics some additional useful range vs. tabletop. I'm not sure this is a huge issue -- IMO short range brawling is the dominant engagement range right now.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

He is basically asking for us to return to MW4 which had the hard range cap, which I'm not against, but as Winterdark said, it doesn't really improve brawling (though it does help missiles compete better against direct fire).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 26 July 2016 - 07:13 AM.

[CygnusX7]

But I want to run my jenner and shoot SHORT range missiles far.

Another it's all about me thread.
Same sh!t, different day.

[EvilCow]

Brawling in pug games has always been difficult in MWO, as soon you are engaged LRMs start raining.

Don't blame pug players blame the dumb game mechanic that allows locks and indirect fire on just observation.

Do you want battle of stompy robots shooting each other? this is not the right game.

[Mudhutwarrior]

High alphas from range did more to stop brawling than LRMs ever could. If the other team is using lrms just face hug the enemy. Then they take damage like you.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 26 July 2016 - 07:12 AM, said:

He is basically asking for us to return to MW4 which had the hard range cap, which I'm not against, but as Winterdark said, it doesn't really improve brawling (though it does help missiles compete better against direct fire).

It would actually be an improvement. If that laser can't go x meters further than it's optimum range there is less suppression which makes it easier to close distance, as you trade less armor.

[Deathlike]

The standard range argument "+1m weapon max/optimal range" = "lol nope" is the only thing reason this comes along.

For brawling, this is kinda BS, but when you're doing the range game (usually mid to long range), this normally should be less of an issue... but in some cases it's inconsistent.

Remember ballistics used to have triple the max range based on the optimal range (Gauss still uses this though) and having ERPPC fired beyond 1km can be considered almost pointless at times.

Still, people still try to fire their medium lasers beyond the 540m max range as if it were a Large Laser (before factoring in range quirks/modules)... so go figure.

[El Bandito]

Viktor Drake, on 26 July 2016 - 05:54 AM, said:

He is talking about reducing the weapons ranges so that the max range of the weapon is the max range, no partial damage for shots outside the max range.

Well, if we had default max range as a rule, then long range missiles would finally be "long" ranged.