Jump to content

Initial Reactions From An 'oldster"


6 replies to this topic

#1 Snardo

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 22 posts
  • LocationUSA East Coast

Posted 18 August 2016 - 04:35 PM

I've been playing Mechwarrior games since they first came out and dabbled in Battletech even before that. That may not be that unusual around here, but that's where I'm coming from. My initial reaction to this is definitely not positive, though I guess big changes are rarely popular initially. Anyway, my first thought was that this totally negates the trade off of using limited ammo-based weapons in order to reduce your heat profile. I've always found this trade space to be fascinating from the mech design standpoint. But that seems to be changing now. If I get penalized the same for firing a medium laser or and AC5 then the only consideration at that point is weapon range. That seems to reduce the decision space in designing a mech.

Have I missed something?

#2 ExAstra

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Predator
  • The Predator
  • 131 posts

Posted 18 August 2016 - 04:40 PM

View PostSnardo, on 18 August 2016 - 04:35 PM, said:

I've been playing Mechwarrior games since they first came out and dabbled in Battletech even before that. That may not be that unusual around here, but that's where I'm coming from. My initial reaction to this is definitely not positive, though I guess big changes are rarely popular initially. Anyway, my first thought was that this totally negates the trade off of using limited ammo-based weapons in order to reduce your heat profile. I've always found this trade space to be fascinating from the mech design standpoint. But that seems to be changing now. If I get penalized the same for firing a medium laser or and AC5 then the only consideration at that point is weapon range. That seems to reduce the decision space in designing a mech.

Have I missed something?

The fact of the matter is that aside from AC/5s and UAC/5s, energy based weaponry is just better in the current meta. High power, pinpoint alpha strikes followed by a bit of hiding to cool off the heat is the way the game is played right now. The system is designed to prevent high damage alpha strikes in general (or discourage, them, rather) whether they're from Lasers, Ballistics, or Missiles. Because if all PGI does is nerf energy weapons, then AC/5s will rise to the top of the meta and at the end of the day little will have really changed.

#3 Gas Guzzler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 14,244 posts
  • LocationCalifornia Central Coast

Posted 18 August 2016 - 05:51 PM

View PostExAstra, on 18 August 2016 - 04:40 PM, said:

The fact of the matter is that aside from AC/5s and UAC/5s, energy based weaponry is just better in the current meta. High power, pinpoint alpha strikes followed by a bit of hiding to cool off the heat is the way the game is played right now. The system is designed to prevent high damage alpha strikes in general (or discourage, them, rather) whether they're from Lasers, Ballistics, or Missiles. Because if all PGI does is nerf energy weapons, then AC/5s will rise to the top of the meta and at the end of the day little will have really changed.


This is 100% objectively false!

U/AC5s are a huge part of the current meta. How can we have real feedback when parts of the community are so misinformed???

#4 Nebuchednezzar

    Member

  • Pip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 17 posts

Posted 18 August 2016 - 06:01 PM

View PostExAstra, on 18 August 2016 - 04:40 PM, said:

The fact of the matter is that aside from AC/5s and UAC/5s, energy based weaponry is just better in the current meta. High power, pinpoint alpha strikes followed by a bit of hiding to cool off the heat is the way the game is played right now. The system is designed to prevent high damage alpha strikes in general (or discourage, them, rather) whether they're from Lasers, Ballistics, or Missiles. Because if all PGI does is nerf energy weapons, then AC/5s will rise to the top of the meta and at the end of the day little will have really changed.


They already messed with the armor. At one time, the most feared mech on the battlefield was a 100 ton mech with a max armor of 308 points (all sections added up). Now, you take 2 IS ERL's, 2 ML and 2 Mg's at 50 meters directly into the rear of a Light mech that's standing still and it should kill that mech outright and yet they take it twice and run away.

I can't tell you how many times I've hit a light mech this way (Jenner, Commando, Cheetah, Spider, Mist Lynx, etc) doing nearly as much damage to their CT armor as the CT has front and back combined without killing it.

Using 2 IS ERL's in the 400-500 meter range when firing on a light mech, 3-4 hits even if spread between all 3 torsos should entirely strip all the armor off and kill the mech but it doesn't so either energy weapons are already nerfed, armor is messed up or the hit boxes are really out of whack.

The FASA mech creation was simple, armor was a maximum of double the internal structure with the exception of the head which was triple. So if a mech had 15 points of internal CT structure, it could have 30 points of armor to be used (front and back) in total so 20 front, 10 rear for example or 25 front, 5 rear as that was what the structure could support.

When you can hit a mech with an open rear CT and it's already yellow or darker with 8 IS ML's doing 40 points, you SHOULD kill that mech but it doesn't.

Adding this new energy consumption feature means that the firing mech is going to have a heat penalty (and likely shutdown), no energy and the mech that he just fired on will turn around and kill him with the heavier weapons.

All weapons have advantages and disadvantages as was already mentioned, size / weight for a higher damage weapon with better heat management characteristics to balance energy weapons on the mech.

This new feature based on it's current function as laid out in their notes, will create a laser boat game in which case, you might as well archive Terra Therma as laser boat pilots tend not to choose that map because of it's heat issues regarding laser boats.

This makes a mech with ballistics a better choice for a hot map and gives it some advantages as opposed to a laser boat on a cold map which can take it's time, range out mechs and make them expend all that ammo until they're left with nothing left to fire in some cases (Archer 9W for example which has no energy points). No ammo means it's a dead mech regardless of what state it's in because it can't shoot back anymore.

Non-Energy based systems fire more rapidly but at a weight / ammo cost. Once they run out of ammo, the weapon is literally dead weight.

If this is the direction PGI is taking, then you are witnessing the slow death of any mech with non-energy hard points on the mech.

#5 Johnny Z

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 9,942 posts
  • LocationDueling on Solaris

Posted 18 August 2016 - 06:05 PM

View PostSnardo, on 18 August 2016 - 04:35 PM, said:

I've been playing Mechwarrior games since they first came out and dabbled in Battletech even before that. That may not be that unusual around here, but that's where I'm coming from. My initial reaction to this is definitely not positive, though I guess big changes are rarely popular initially. Anyway, my first thought was that this totally negates the trade off of using limited ammo-based weapons in order to reduce your heat profile. I've always found this trade space to be fascinating from the mech design standpoint. But that seems to be changing now. If I get penalized the same for firing a medium laser or and AC5 then the only consideration at that point is weapon range. That seems to reduce the decision space in designing a mech.

Have I missed something?


Have you tried it yet for yourself?

#6 Balthzar Hazen

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 32 posts

Posted 18 August 2016 - 06:22 PM

I to have been playing this game from tabletop through all digital incarnations. and my thoughts are pretty simple. you are going to have two types of people.

1. Meta only runners who believe in ALPHA I don't need to describe the people or teams that will have a problem with this but they will have a fit.

2. casual and semi competitive players. some will be more impacted than others

After having read through what they are trying to do I think it actually will help the game (waiting for all of the people to start beating me up over that comment) it will force teams to use new tactics new strategy and new META.

Change is not a bad thing. There is an expression that is "change or die" those that fail to adapt will die, games that don't evolve dwindle down to nothing and die. This is part of the reason MS gave up on the MW franchise and tried the abomination called MechAssault which was the biggest mistake. I am sure some people will post about the faults of PGI in this part or my suppositions.

The reason for public test is so that things can be looked at and changes made.

For those that just complain be thankful we have Mech at all because if it weren't for PGI we wouldn't. Not that I agree with everything they do I just have to look at it from that point.

So I am downloading the public test client now and I soooooooo can't wait to hear all of the people bi**hing and moaning about how this is going to kill the game. Adapt or die, change or die, evolve or die.

Lastly Bitching and moaning won't change squat so go into this trying to see the best possible implementation for this because its looking like a heck of a lot better system than the current heat system.

#7 pyrocomp

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 1,036 posts

Posted 18 August 2016 - 06:25 PM

View PostGas Guzzler, on 18 August 2016 - 05:51 PM, said:


This is 100% objectively false!

U/AC5s are a huge part of the current meta. How can we have real feedback when parts of the community are so misinformed???

Ahem. Let's say it this way. Most of the community just do not know how to use those effectively. UACs are sensitive to button mashing which is a general way to fire weapons. Thus constant jammings (a friend of mine was able to get 5 out of 6 cUAC5 on jam once and 4 out of 6 regularily) that make those undesirable. Such way leads to the example when an individual will discard assault rifle in favour of a club as assault rifles usually make poor clubs.

So while a system in good hands may be horrifyingly effective it still does not make in overpowered in general. You will have to account not only how that weapon behaves in the selected group, but how that is in general population. Gauss was deemed secondary weapon. Now with extreme cooldown nerf but without charge people again see Gauss as a mighty weapon. The weapon got nerfed, but got easier use. Same with UACs. People are not capable of using those properly and do not see then as a threat.

And 6xcUAC/5 build got problems with this system, btw. No longer good.

Edited by pyrocomp, 18 August 2016 - 06:27 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users