24 replies to this topic

[Shadowspawn42]

For those who say alphas are a problem and TTK is too short, here is a simple change that does not break brawling as an option:

Double the armor on all mechs and double the structure points. Halve the weight of armor. Double the amount of consumable ammo per ton.

Problem Solved.

You will get the same (or better) increase in TTK as with the ED system. But brawling doesnt become a waste of a mech.

[Spleenslitta]

It is the simplest way of doing it. It's guarantied to work at least. Better than ED no matter how i look at it.
But looking at it from another angle. It brings nothing new to the game nor is it exciting.

That's what your idea, ED and GH have in common - They are all kinda boring. Doesn't make MWO standout from other games.

[Lostdragon]

Spleenslitta, on 30 August 2016 - 08:52 AM, said:

It is the simplest way of doing it. It's guarantied to work at least. Better than ED no matter how i look at it.
But looking at it from another angle. It brings nothing new to the game nor is it exciting.

That's what your idea, ED and GH have in common - They are all kinda boring. Doesn't make MWO standout from other games.

The game already stands out due to unique mechanics that most other games don't have. PGI needs to stop reinventing cumbersome and contrived ways to penalize things and instead balance with the excellent tools already built into the system. Then their designers and programmers could move on to working on what the game actually needs to become a standout product: depth and content.

[Shadowspawn42]

Spleenslitta, on 30 August 2016 - 08:52 AM, said:

It is the simplest way of doing it. It's guarantied to work at least. Better than ED no matter how i look at it.
But looking at it from another angle. It brings nothing new to the game nor is it exciting.

That's what your idea, ED and GH have in common - They are all kinda boring. Doesn't make MWO standout from other games.

I dont play MWO because its different than other games. I play MWO because it is fun. And it is balanced. AS IT IS RIGHT NOW. I have seen nothing to convince me that there is anything that needs fixing other than...

OMG Ghost Heat sucks!

Ok, maybe its not cannon. And maybe it doesnt make sense from a physics perspective. But lets ignore both of these thought trains and focus on the problems because I dont get what the problem with the game play is.

Right now game play is fun. And its BALANCED across weight classes and play styles.

The problem with ED is that it neuters brawling.

The problem with MY suggestion is that it neuters sniping.

Neither solution leaves the game in balance. Each one kills a particular play style while leaving the rest alone. This is NOT acceptable.

Some say Alphas are a problem. Some say snipers are a problem. Some say LRMs are a problem. Some say Assaults are OP. Some say Lights are OP. And all of these are subjective to an individual players preferred play style.

I love Brawling. I cant stand matches on Polar Highlands and Alpine Peaks because I usually end up dead before I get to fight. However, under the current system, IF I can get in close without getting eaten alive (and thats a big IF on those maps) at least I can get my payback in terms of sustained DPS over a 15 second time frame. Under ED, I will get eaten up trying to get in close and IF I make it in close I will be at a serious disadvantage because that sniper can do the same DPS as me...but I already am beat up just trying to close the distance.

Risk VS Reward.
Gameplay Balance.

Right now the system is damn good. ED breaks it as it is implemented. Any changes that break one of the fundamental playstyles inherint in MWO is BAD. I mean, I would love my suggestion here to be implemented because Brawling would be left intact. Mid range skirmishes would be left intact. LRMs would take a mild hit. And Sniping would take a huge hit. Great for me....but not balanced and not great for people who enjoy sniping as a gameplay mechanic.

Edited by Shadowspawn42, 30 August 2016 - 09:29 AM.

[Shadowspawn42]

As it stands I dont think Energy Draw will do much to increase TTK. TTK isnt just about one mech's ability to burst or even sustain, its more about concentrated fire...and ED as implemented really only affects brawlers in a significant fashion, not snipers and LRMs.

This idea is still by far the best I've read to increase TTK. What say you, PGI?

[1453 R]

Shadowspawn42, on 30 August 2016 - 09:27 AM, said:

...
Right now game play is fun. And its BALANCED across weight classes and play styles.
...

Highly debatable. Lighter, faster machines that are unable to stand up to the frequent heavy superspikes of 70+-ton uberquirked Sphere 'Mechs of heavily-gunned OmniMechs, nor able to remotely match their firepower, have been squeezed out of the game in many respects. Mediums and lights are frequently underrepresented; the game has been top-heavy since its introduction because having a crushing advantage in both durability and firepower both will usually trump an advantage in mobility. Skirmishing doesn't really exist - either you're rugged enough to get stuck in and BRAWL, knuckles-to-face, or you don't accomplish anything worthwhile.

I say this as someone who pretty much always prefers mobility, skirmishing, and battles of maneuver over static musket-line battles in any game where the choice exists. With a small handful of shaky exceptions, maneuver-oriented 'Mechs do not significantly affect the outcome of a match - it is dominated in all realistic respects by the fatbros who aren't sure how to spell 'maneuver', let alone employ it.

So yeah. Maybe having ED in place to curtail fatbros being able to instagib anyone they please at any given point in time might be worth experimenting with.

[Tarl Cabot]

You mean double the armor and structural points again? PGI had already doubled them in closed beta. Or may simply change the current 2x (armor/is from base) to 3x?

Sniping in MWO is not the sniping seen in other games, sniping in MWO is not a one shot/one kill scenario, it is an harassment tool. Unfortunately for many, it is more about targets of opportunity instead of targeting the mechs that need to be distracted.

GH 1.0 was about suppressing specific builds, generating GH when x-amount of specific weapons were used, ignoring the synergy between different weapon groups, while leaving the standard, not really there heatscale that does nothing til 100+.

[JC Daxion]

Shadowspawn42, on 30 August 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

For those who say alphas are a problem and TTK is too short, here is a simple change that does not break brawling as an option:

Double the armor on all mechs and double the structure points. Halve the weight of armor. Double the amount of consumable ammo per ton.

Problem Solved.

You will get the same (or better) increase in TTK as with the ED system. But brawling doesnt become a waste of a mech.

I have heard some crazy things but i think this takes it.. I've stated many times, and i will state it again.. ED has barely changed how i play, My mechs rarely have a high alpha, and i've always been a brawling DPSer..

Now the big difference is while i am brawling and DPS'ing, anyone that decide to hit me with some super alpha now gets a huge heat penalty, and will make my finishing them that much easier.

People that don't think you can brawl with under 30 points alpha's just never learned to do it.. I dunno what else to say.. One of my hardest hitting brawlers is the Cent AH, 20 points, and 16.. I have had more 5+ kills in this mech than any other mech, it is also one of two mechs that i got 8.. i regulatory get 2-3 KMD's.. I am not the greatest player by any stretch, but ED IMO will only help me brawl, not hurt.. But those that only know alpha and twist/hide.. then they might not do so well...


Brawling should be, and will be more about timing, and who is the better pilot.. But i guess we will see..

[MechaBattler]

People stop suggesting alternate methods. You know they're not going to do it.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

The problem with doubling armor and structure again is that heavier mechs get more armor, way more. Doing it once from the TT values wasn't so bad since the gap wasn't too big, but it widens more every time.

[Spleenslitta]

Lostdragon, on 30 August 2016 - 09:14 AM, said:

The game already stands out due to unique mechanics that most other games don't have.

That may be but it does not stand out enough. Right now we got GH and that will be replaced by ED and quite frankly i don't even notice the difference in the amount of firepower i got.

We got a simple heat system and this patchwork ED / GH. But this is a freakin' robot shooter that is supposed to be advanced.
But it's still so simple. There are a bunch of ideas on this PTS feedback forum that would make MWO far more advanced.

Problem is that PGI wants only simple solutions that they can program within weeks. They do not want to work for a solution that could take a year or half a year to program.
With such half arsed work MWO will just stay a mediocre game that doesn't seperate much from the usual crowd of shooters.
That's my opinion and i'm bored with MWO....bored.

[L3mming2]

Shadowspawn42, on 30 August 2016 - 09:27 AM, said:

I dont play MWO because its different than other games. I play MWO because it is fun. And it is balanced. AS IT IS RIGHT NOW. I have seen nothing to convince me that there is anything that needs fixing other than...

OMG Ghost Heat sucks!

Ok, maybe its not cannon. And maybe it doesnt make sense from a physics perspective. But lets ignore both of these thought trains and focus on the problems because I dont get what the problem with the game play is.

Right now game play is fun. And its BALANCED across weight classes and play styles.

The problem with ED is that it neuters brawling.

The problem with MY suggestion is that it neuters sniping.

Neither solution leaves the game in balance. Each one kills a particular play style while leaving the rest alone. This is NOT acceptable.

Some say Alphas are a problem. Some say snipers are a problem. Some say LRMs are a problem. Some say Assaults are OP. Some say Lights are OP. And all of these are subjective to an individual players preferred play style.

I love Brawling. I cant stand matches on Polar Highlands and Alpine Peaks because I usually end up dead before I get to fight. However, under the current system, IF I can get in close without getting eaten alive (and thats a big IF on those maps) at least I can get my payback in terms of sustained DPS over a 15 second time frame. Under ED, I will get eaten up trying to get in close and IF I make it in close I will be at a serious disadvantage because that sniper can do the same DPS as me...but I already am beat up just trying to close the distance.

Risk VS Reward.
Gameplay Balance.

Right now the system is damn good. ED breaks it as it is implemented. Any changes that break one of the fundamental playstyles inherint in MWO is BAD. I mean, I would love my suggestion here to be implemented because Brawling would be left intact. Mid range skirmishes would be left intact. LRMs would take a mild hit. And Sniping would take a huge hit. Great for me....but not balanced and not great for people who enjoy sniping as a gameplay mechanic.

brawling is quite ok on the pts imo, (i prefere it too over sniping) example a 10 cspl build rips apart anny sniper at close range, it gets a pinpoint 20dps (short range) by alternating fire between 2*30 damage...
a other posible build is a ebonyjag with 2uac20's firing with 0.5 sec between the 2 (if u put them in chainfire they wil do it automaticaly) this to will put you at a dps of ~20 and give you a alpha of 40 spread over 1s...

other posybilitys are archer 5W's with 9srm4's (if u use them with a chainfire macro u can get insane dps)
in pts 2 you can go for a plectora of builds with 4srm6's and the ocasional flamer(s)
the pts 2 did screw over the 2*ac20 builds do, they are to hot now..

a lbx 20 and 2 a+srm 6 work ok to...

ore 4srm6 and a second punch in 5cspl...

as a side note, due to snipers being limited to smaller alphas i find it way less puniching to take fire when i advance. if u get hit in the left torso for 30 you just twist and take the next volly in the right torso. on life both those volly's would have gone in the same torso striping ore severly damaging that torso. the next shot would make you lose that torso and be chansles in the brawl (ore dead)

[Pjwned]

Nice, I'm looking forward to lights & mediums getting ****ed in the *** while heavies & assaults reign supreme forever with their massive survivability advantage.

Oh wait, I'm not looking forward to that because it's a **** idea.

[davoodoo]

Doesnt battletech license itself make game stand out in 2016??

Pjwned, on 01 September 2016 - 04:57 AM, said:

Nice, I'm looking forward to lights & mediums getting ****ed in the *** while heavies & assaults reign supreme forever with their massive survivability advantage.

Oh wait, I'm not looking forward to that because it's a **** idea.

x2 armor
light is twice as durable
medium is twice as durable
heavy is twice as durable
assault is twice as durable

Thats as baseline cause quirks actually lost their value so assaults would lose the most without quirk adjustments.

So idk what youre smoking...

Edited by davoodoo, 01 September 2016 - 12:06 PM.

[C E Dwyer]

Or just lower the heat thresh hold before mechs shut down

[Pjwned]

davoodoo, on 01 September 2016 - 12:04 PM, said:

Doesnt battletech license itself make game stand out in 2016??


x2 armor
light is twice as durable
medium is twice as durable
heavy is twice as durable
assault is twice as durable

Thats as baseline cause quirks actually lost their value so assaults would lose the most without quirk adjustments.

So idk what youre smoking...

You suck at math then. Let's take the most extreme example to illustrate the point.

Without quirks, 20 ton mechs like the Locust have 120 armor & 60 structure on the whole mech excluding the head, so assuming the head didn't have increased armor or structure the mech would end up with 240 armor & 120 structure.

Without quirks, 100 ton mechs like the Atlas have 596 armor & 298 structure on the whole mech excluding the head so assuming the head didn't have increased armor or structure the mech would end up with 1,192 armor & 596 structure.

I'm pretty sure an increase of 596 armor & 298 structure is a lot higher than an increase of 120 armor & 60 structure, hence why lighter mechs get screwed.

[Appuagab]

That's very dumb solution but... But it would help. Also, I think that the one that should get buffed is structure but not armor. Buffing structure hitpoints while keeping armor at same values would make critical hits more valuable. If structure gets equal to 100% of max armor this would be also more intuitive.

And

Cathy, on 01 September 2016 - 12:38 PM, said:

Or just lower the heat thresh hold before mechs shut down

Yes. P G I L O W E R H E A T C A P A C I T Y P L E A S E.

[davoodoo]

Pjwned, on 01 September 2016 - 08:34 PM, said:

You suck at math then. Let's take the most extreme example to illustrate the point.

Without quirks, 20 ton mechs like the Locust have 120 armor & 60 structure on the whole mech excluding the head, so assuming the head didn't have increased armor or structure the mech would end up with 240 armor & 120 structure.

Without quirks, 100 ton mechs like the Atlas have 596 armor & 298 structure on the whole mech excluding the head so assuming the head didn't have increased armor or structure the mech would end up with 1,192 armor & 596 structure.

I'm pretty sure an increase of 596 armor & 298 structure is a lot higher than an increase of 120 armor & 60 structure, hence why lighter mechs get screwed.

Both can take twice as much.

Ratio between armor of assault and light is still the same...

1192/240=4.96
596/120=4.96

So no matter how you look at it, doubling armor wont make 1 more powerful than other unless quirks are involved...

Edited by davoodoo, 02 September 2016 - 12:18 AM.

[Kurbeks]

Idea is good. But like plp said ti will nerf lights too much.

That's the problem with this game, Light especially (20-25t) lights were not meant to fight larger mech, but do scouting and anti-infrantry, anti-vechicle combat in lore. Same as with weapons like AC/2, MG, Flamer are not meant to fight vs. bigger mechs. As there is still no info warfare, PGI have made light mechs OP for their intended role, at expense of assults for gameplay balance. So you either get OP lights (from lore standpoint), with weak assaults (generaly speaking, not Kodiak). Or you get balanced out meds/heavies/assults, with completely usless lights as they can't fullify their role.

davoodoo, on 02 September 2016 - 12:13 AM, said:

Both can take twice as much.

Ratio between armor of assault and light is still the same...

1192/240=4.96
596/120=4.96

So no matter how you look at it, doubling armor wont make 1 more powerful than other unless quirks are involved...

Yet slot ratio is not same. Basically making light too powerful. Locust (not counting accutators and bla bla) has same slot count as Atlas while being big as Atl;as leg. Making lights take both endo and ferro easily.

[davoodoo]

Kurbeks, on 02 September 2016 - 12:50 AM, said:

Yet slot ratio is not same. Basically making light too powerful. Locust (not counting accutators and bla bla) has same slot count as Atlas while being big as Atl;as leg. Making lights take both endo and ferro easily.

What that got to do with armor value??

every mech(unless they got extra legs) got same amount of slots whether its 20 tonner or 150 tonner, it was like that as long as i remember.

Edited by davoodoo, 02 September 2016 - 01:12 AM.