196 replies to this topic

[dervishx5]

Why don't you like me Gas? You never like me anymore.

[LordNothing]

if you eliminate alpha strikes and boats, then theres not a whole lot else you can do with this game. id love to be able to spend more time in the mech lab, but if you cant boat and you cant alpha, there is not much else to do.

i kind of disagree about everyone building for alpha. of course you build to maximize your damage rating. but mixed builds (which is also the antithesis of boating), generally rotate groups. an alpha is wasteful for a mixed build, because weapons have different velocities and/or mechanics. the only way srms, a gauss and lasers are all going to land where you want them is if your target is standing still. you kind of want to lead those targets a little more with the srms, slightly with the gauss (not to mention charging it), and not at all with the lasers. you run cooler for not tripping penalties, at the expense of more complex fire control. pd is going to worsen that aspect a little bit, since there is going to be fewer hard barriers to heat penalties.

i really dont think we should be getting rid of any of those tactics. they should all have pros and cons. 3 bar was one idea that was meant to give better mechanics taylored to each hardpoint type. it would blunt the high alpha laser vomit problem, not enough to make it go away, but enough to make metabuilders think twice and consider other ideas. boats would be focusing all their weapons into one set of mechanics and so they would need longer intervals between trigger pulls to cool down. mixed builds would be spreading it out and racking up fewer penalties as a result. i really think it has potential, and would really just require cut and pasting the ed system 3 times, with each bar having different detrimental effects.

[Hotthedd]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 30 August 2016 - 10:51 AM, said:

What has the ability to alpha ad infinitum currently, is actually good, and would be affected by power draw but isn't effected by ghost heat?

There is a reason I wrote group/group/alpha. And there a lots of good builds that do exactly that.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 30 August 2016 - 10:51 AM, said:

Some people believe this to be the case as many have argued essentially that alphas are a crutch.

Yes, like me. Because they are. (At least it is so much easier for me, as to be boring)
It is infinitely easier to put multiple shots on one component with one click when you let magic insta-convergence do it.

[Hotthedd]

dervishx5, on 30 August 2016 - 10:52 AM, said:

Nope. But I know for 100% certainty that whatever "balance" THE PROPHET can come up with will silence the concerns only until the good players find the new meta, and then we're all back here arguing on the forum. In turn THE PROPHET must align more resources to balancing MWO rather than adding new content to it. And the vicious cycle continues.

It is impossible to balance small weapons to be good by themselves, as long as they can be combined into one mega weapon.

But when people mention discouraging alpha/group fire from being the only way to play, there are certain people who get very very scared.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 11:33 AM, said:

There is a reason I wrote group/group/alpha. And there a lots of good builds that do exactly that.

The problem with tagging group fire in that, is there are still a lot of mechs that are able to do just that *cough*dakka*cough* and you didn't give me an example.

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 11:33 AM, said:

Yes, like me. Because they are. (At least it is so much easier for me, as to be boring)
It is infinitely easier to put multiple shots on one component with one click when you let magic insta-convergence do it.

First, they aren't a crutch, players don't rely on them to be good.
Second, sure, it is easier to group fire weapons over chain fire, but ED only hurts a select set of group fires and upsets the balance between burst and sustained damage to do it.
Third, forced chain fire isn't a game I would play, and I know I'm not the only one, it just isn't something that is fun.

[Hotthedd]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 30 August 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:

First, they aren't a crutch, players don't rely on them to be good.
Second, sure, it is easier to group fire weapons over chain fire, but ED only hurts a select set of group fires and upsets the balance between burst and sustained damage to do it.
Third, forced chain fire isn't a game I would play, and I know I'm not the only one, it just isn't something that is fun.

First, they are a crutch, because even good players are forced to resort to it against other good players to be effective (because its easier, and the other guy is doing it too).
Second, You have not seen me advocating in favor of ED.
Third, I am also not advocating for forced chain fire, you know my position. I would like both options to be viable, and one better than the other in some situations, and vice versa.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 11:49 AM, said:

First, they are a crutch, because even good players are forced to resort to it against other good players to be effective (because its easier, and the other guy is doing it too).

That doesn't make it a crutch, a crutch is something that props up someone above their actual skill level. Noobtubes are essentially this, *cough*lurms*cough*. As Derv said, if you expect the good players in the game to suddenly stop crushing players like they do now, you are very naive. What's next, spamming dakka, aiming for side torsos, or actually using cover will be the next "crutch"?

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 11:49 AM, said:

Third, I am also not advocating for forced chain fire, you know my position. I would like both options to be viable, and one better than the other in some situations, and vice versa.

I will tell you as I did before, they will never be viable at the same time because of the complexity of mech design (small weapons that need to be boated to be as effective as much larger weapons, weapon firing behaviors, weapon roles, etc).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 30 August 2016 - 11:56 AM.

[dervishx5]

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 11:49 AM, said:

First, they are a crutch, because even good players are forced to resort to it against other good players to be effective (because its easier, and the other guy is doing it too).
Second, You have not seen me advocating in favor of ED.
Third, I am also not advocating for forced chain fire, you know my position. I would like both options to be viable, and one better than the other in some situations, and vice versa.

THE ONLY CRUTCHES I NEED ARE THOSE I GIVE TO FREEBIRTHS AFTER I CONQUER THEIR INFERIOR MONGREL PLANETS!

Edited by dervishx5, 30 August 2016 - 12:00 PM.

[Hotthedd]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 30 August 2016 - 11:53 AM, said:

That doesn't make it a crutch, a crutch is something that props up someone above their actual skill level. Noobtubes are essentially this, *cough*lurms*cough*.

No, a crutch is something that makes doing something easier. For example: A crutch. (It might even be where they get the term, ya think?)

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 30 August 2016 - 11:53 AM, said:

As Derv said, if you expect the good players in the game to suddenly stop crushing players like they do now, you are very naive. What's next, spamming dakka, aiming for side torsos, or actually using cover will be the next "crutch"?

Have I ever said good players will no longer be good players, or that they would stop winning?
The fact that this Red Herring is always thrown about does make me think: Perhaps they doest protest overmuch?

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 30 August 2016 - 11:53 AM, said:

I will tell you as I did before, they will never be viable at the same time because of the complexity of mech design (small weapons that need to be boated to be as effective as much larger weapons, weapon firing behaviors, weapon roles, etc).

You don't even see it do you? It is circular reasoning.
Your premise is that small weapons need to be boated, and your conclusion is because of that premise, small weapons need to be boated.
The fact is that they don't. They can be made effective (for their role) on their own. However, this would necessitate that they cannot be combined into one super weapon due to their small size and weight.

[dervishx5]

It's not a red herring if we're saying that all this focusing on balancing the game is directly harming it and not accomplishing anything.

[Hotthedd]

dervishx5, on 30 August 2016 - 11:59 AM, said:

THE ONLY CRUTCHES I NEED ARE THOSE I GIVE TO FREEBIRTHS AFTER I CONQUER THEIR INFERIOR MONGREL PLANETS!

Umm, you are currently under contract to the Draconis Combine...

But seriously, would you even seriously consider dropping into a competitive match and not alpha/group fire almost the entire time?

dervishx5, on 30 August 2016 - 12:07 PM, said:

It's not a red herring if we're saying that all this focusing on balancing the game is directly harming it and not accomplishing anything.

No, its exactly a Red Herring. The topic is about balance, and the counter argument is "better players will still be better".
It doesn't address the argument at all.

[dervishx5]

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 12:08 PM, said:

Umm, you are currently under contract to the Draconis Combine...

But seriously, would you even seriously consider dropping into a competitive match and not alpha/group fire almost the entire time?

I only consider what the current meta is. Whether it's alpha strike or not, I will do what reaps the most benefit for the lowest cost. And people will always complain about that.

You talk about circular reasoning, but isn't it safe to say that balance is never going to stop being an issue? Constantly focusing on tweaking balance rather than ignoring it for now and assigning resources elsewhere is an unending circle. With that in mind, PGI should focus on adding new features to the game rather than listening to the balance issues for now. People enjoying the depth of the game is much more important than the ceaseless pushing of the balance boulder up the hill.

All this focus on balance is killing the game.

Edited by dervishx5, 30 August 2016 - 12:16 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 12:10 PM, said:

No, its exactly a Red Herring. The topic is about balance, and the counter argument is "better players will still be better".
It doesn't address the argument at all.

As soon as you accept that group fire will never be balanced with chainfire then we can move on to more relevant discussions.

The "better players" clause is in response to people who champion Energy Draw as something that will "remove the alpha strike crutch and show us who the real skilled players are" secretly hoping that they will emerge as a champion of the mixed/bracket build BattleMech, finally having a game that caters to what they want, so they can live out their super-MechWarrior fantasy of being the best on the battlefield, recounting each drop of sweat between each trigger pull, valiantly watching thine energy draw pool with such expertise that no one can hope to contend with their wait-for-the-energy-to-recharge prowess.

Yeah its all a pipe-dream, and the realization will set in once (if) Energy Draw is put in game and the meta settles out to what we all predict it will be, and the people championing Energy Draw now will be complaining about the abuse of whatever happens to be most ideal in the Energy Draw system and how it is a "crutch" that needs to be removed.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 30 August 2016 - 12:26 PM.

[Hotthedd]

dervishx5, on 30 August 2016 - 12:12 PM, said:

I only consider what the current meta is. Whether it's alpha strike or not, I will do what reaps the most benefit for the lowest cost. And people will always complain about that.

Consider for a moment, that the complaint is not about players using a system that is most beneficial to them, (as that behavior is only natural) but about the fact that it dumbs the game down, and the game would be better for changing it.
...Do you not think that I do not use that very mechanic in competitive games? I just hate that I have to.

dervishx5, on 30 August 2016 - 12:12 PM, said:

You talk about circular reasoning, but isn't it safe to say that balance is never going to stop being an issue? Constantly focusing on tweaking balance rather than ignoring it for now and assigning resources elsewhere is an unending circle.

Okay, but that is much different than circular reasoning.

dervishx5, on 30 August 2016 - 12:12 PM, said:

With that in mind, PGI should focus on adding new features to the game rather than listening to the balance issues for now. People enjoying the depth of the game is much more important than the ceaseless pushing of the balance boulder up the hill.

All this focus on balance is killing the game.

I can agree 100% that the focus of the game needs to be on adding content. My point about balance is that it is impossible as long as many small weapons can be morphed into one big weapon. (The small weapons must be kept weak in that scenario)
Fixing that issue makes balancing the weapons easier, allowing more time to be spent on adding new features.

[Hotthedd]

Gas Guzzler, on 30 August 2016 - 12:22 PM, said:

As soon as you accept that group fire will never be balanced with chainfire than we can move on to more relevant discussions.

As soon as you give me a reason that it cannot or should not, we can do that. But I am not taking your authority on the subject.

Gas Guzzler, on 30 August 2016 - 12:22 PM, said:

The "better players" clause is in response to people who champion Energy Draw as something that will "remove the alpha strike crutch and show us who the real skilled players are" secretly hoping that they will emerge as a champion of the mixed/bracket build BattleMech, finally having a game that caters to what they want, so they can live out their super-MechWarrior fantasy of being the best on the battlefield, recounting each drop of sweat between each trigger pull, valiantly watching thine energy draw pool with such expertise that no one can hope to contend with their wait-for-the-energy-to-recharge prowess.

It must be an awesome burden knowing what is going on inside peoples' minds without THEM even knowing it.
Good luck with that.

Gas Guzzler, on 30 August 2016 - 12:22 PM, said:

Yeah its all a pipe-dream, and the realization will set in once (if) Energy Draw is put in game and the meta settles out to what we all predict it will be, and the people championing Energy Draw now will be complaining about the abuse of whatever happens to be most ideal in the Energy Draw system and how it is a "crutch" that needs to be removed.

I have never been a champion of Energy Draw, so...

[Myantra]

Boating / alpha-striking / balance are always going to be "issues" with a MechWarrior game. Something gets nerfed, something else gets buffed, a new meta will always be found. That is really inherent in the nature of allowing Mechs to be customized. Even if you could not modify Mechs, certain chassis and loadouts would become the meta. In comparison to its predecessors, I would call MWO quite balanced, whether we are talking weapons or Mech weight classes.

FPS games with different weapons, weapon classes, and attachments that modify weapons have the same problem. A meta will always emerge, and it will always adapt to "balance". I would rather the developers spend their time trying to improve the "all game modes are just team deathmatch by another name" static gameplay. I think that would improve MWO more than Energy Draw or chasing the revolving door of balance ever would.

[dervishx5]

"This is unbalanced" -> Paul "fixes" it -> "This is unbalanced" -> Paul "fixes" it -> "This is unbalanced" -> Paul "fixes" it -> "This is unbalanced" -> Paul "fixes" it -> ∞

Not sure what limiting/removing alpha strike does to fix or improve this cycle.

I mean I think I see where you're going with it Hott. In theory limiting alpha strike would increase TTK and people would be able to do more. But in practice, as has been demonstrated many times (see: LL Stalker), this isn't going to be true. I'm saying the meta will adapt and you'll see mechs dying about as quickly.

It seems like a lot of effort for not much gain. Unless you enforce chain-fire then whatever hybrid version of alpha/chain we get will not change things much.

Edited by dervishx5, 30 August 2016 - 12:39 PM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 12:29 PM, said:

As soon as you give me a reason that it cannot or should not, we can do that. But I am not taking your authority on the subject.

It must be an awesome burden knowing what is going on inside peoples' minds without THEM even knowing it.
Good luck with that.

I have never been a champion of Energy Draw, so...

It's not a question of whether or not it should be balanced which is an opinion. I just find it extremely unlikely that it will ever be, so I don't think wasting time talking about it is a worthwhile use of time.

Considering that aside from my embellishment, what was in quotes has actually been said, and the attitudes of others goes along with that sentiment, I think I'm generally aware that that thought process is definitely present in many Energy Draw proponents.

Never said you were championing energy draw, I was just letting you know where the "better players" clause was coming from because you didn't know why it kept coming up.

[Ultimax]

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 11:49 AM, said:

First, they are a crutch, because even good players are forced to resort to it against other good players to be effective (because its easier, and the other guy is doing it too).

There is a reason why firing a gun is as simple as pulling a trigger, it's not a crutch - it's simply efficient.


The same goes for boating.

Its more efficient when firing your weapons, and exposes you to less return fire.

It is both an offensive and defensive measure.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 12:05 PM, said:

No, a crutch is something that makes doing something easier. For example: A crutch. (It might even be where they get the term, ya think?)

A crutch doesn't make it easier to walk if you have two legs.

The quote from Websters:

Quote

something that a person uses too much for help or support

If you think that good players rely on this too much for support of their skill, you are in for a rude awakening because they will be good even in a forced chain fire environment, whether they find the game interesting enough to actually bother with it is another story.

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 12:05 PM, said:

Have I ever said good players will no longer be good players, or that they would stop winning?

The implication that is a crutch says you do, or at least a subset will, because apparently using any advantage is a "crutch" to you (what about practicing, is that a crutch too?).

Hotthedd, on 30 August 2016 - 12:05 PM, said:

However, this would necessitate that they cannot be combined into one super weapon due to their small size and weight.

Ignoring your premise vs conclusion crap because it actually isn't my premise, but this is the funny part. Being combined into one super weapon due to their weight and size IS the selling point of having a bunch of varying weights in weapons. How do you balance a weapon that costs you 0.5 tons and 1 slot versus one that costs you 14 tons and 10 slots, especially in an environment that hates grouped weapons?

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 30 August 2016 - 01:13 PM.