140 replies to this topic

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

I haven't been buying anything since ED was announced. I don't see a point in buying a mech when game mechanics could change and leave it worse off than before. On top of that I dislike ED, it effectively kills a lot of mixed builds, leaves ballistic boating on top, allows for a few crazy super laser loadouts to be somewhat viable, hurts brawlers, removes a lot of reason to even bring a gauss rifle when it already isn't really that great.

I honestly don't like anything about it and I'd be happy if we just went and removed ghost heat entirely too then increase heat on weapons that need it.

[Ragnahawk]

What are you all complaining about? Gauss while having a charge up mechanic generates 0 heat, and has the best velocity in the game right next to a ac2. 15 points of damage that rarely misses, 600 meters. How can you complain about something that everyone uses? Ac20s, someone complained about them being OP. WELL GUESS WHAT! You can fire the ac20 for up to 3 times together now!!! If you want to run huge alphas, your gonna get that penalty if you fire it all at once. Split it up and you will do reasonable well. Flamers just got better at shutting mechs down. Small lasers are no longer linked. Single heatsinks might actually become viable for its capacity. These are all changes that should be respected and welcomed into the game. It adds for longer games, less steamrolls and better tactics. Keep the gauss charge, it forces you to plan your shots, and if you make a ton of mistakes maybe you weren't meant to use that weapon, or you need to practice more. Git gud stop whining.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Red FireAnt, on 13 September 2016 - 04:30 AM, said:

Small lasers are no longer linked.

You realize that everything is linked under ED? You also realize that Gauss also heavily drains energy under ED meaning mixing it with hot weaponry such as ERPPCs or lasers is much less viable?

Even without a charge up gauss seems pretty balanced out by the high weight, very low health, extremely easy to explode gun, and low DPS. I mean a single AC2 beats the Gauss in DPS and is half the weight. Why does it need to be nerf batted into oblivion?

All these changes really are going to do is have the people who already got gud just swap their loadouts to the most viable thing that comes up. I'm not doubting my ability or anyone else's ability to exploit the new system, I'm just saying its a worse system than our current one.

[Pariah Devalis]

Dakota1000, on 13 September 2016 - 05:01 AM, said:

You realize that everything is linked under ED? You also realize that Gauss also heavily drains energy under ED meaning mixing it with hot weaponry such as ERPPCs or lasers is much less viable?

Even without a charge up gauss seems pretty balanced out by the high weight, very low health, extremely easy to explode gun, and low DPS. I mean a single AC2 beats the Gauss in DPS and is half the weight. Why does it need to be nerf batted into oblivion?

All these changes really are going to do is have the people who already got gud just swap their loadouts to the most viable thing that comes up. I'm not doubting my ability or anyone else's ability to exploit the new system, I'm just saying its a worse system than our current one.

Because the existence of no-charge Gauss obsoleted IS AC20s back in the day, even with the explosion chance. Was way too easy to brawl with. Had far more range. Had a faster projectile speed. Basically a far more flexible weapon system at moderate risk of use, and ran ice cold. Even with Power Draw, two gauss only netted you, what, 2+6 heat? For 30 pinpoint, frontloaded damage with near instantaneous travel times? C'mon, now.

Hell, at least the 15 damage C-ERPPC was hotter than hell to fire, and a slower projectile. At least it had a drawback. Even then, 15 damage was too much - though I still persist in arguing that it should have been reduced to 13 with the same long 7 second cooldown, as opposed to the total reversion with extra heat over live servers. Gauss rifles being explosive just isn't enough of a drawback given the ranges you can use them at vs the next nearest weapon in raw damage, being the IS AC20.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 13 September 2016 - 05:08 AM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Pariah Devalis, on 13 September 2016 - 05:07 AM, said:

Because the existence of no-charge Gauss obsoleted IS AC20s back in the day, even with the explosion chance. Was way too easy to brawl with. Had far more range. Had a faster projectile speed. Basically a far more flexible weapon system at moderate risk of use, and ran ice cold. Even with Power Draw, two gauss only netted you, what, 2+6 heat? For 30 pinpoint, frontloaded damage with near instantaneous travel times? C'mon, now.

Hell, at least the 15 damage C-ERPPC was hotter than hell to fire, and a slower projectile. At least it had a drawback. Even then, 15 damage was too much - though I still persist in arguing that it should have been reduced to 13 with the same long 7 second cooldown, as opposed to the total reversion with extra heat over live servers. Gauss rifles being explosive just isn't enough of a drawback given the ranges you can use them at vs the next nearest weapon in raw damage, being the IS AC20.

Gauss rifles were able to be used to brawl with, but an AC20 still would be better in that situation. The AC20 deals 5 more damage per shot, is a ton lighter, has nearly double the damage per second, and if you happen to get the armor stripped on that component the gauss rifle is in its going to go off and possibly take that section with it just about instantly.

The gauss is a nice gun for range, but really its no match for an AC20 in their optimal ranges, infact you'd need two of them against one AC20 to have an advantage, and only a slight one at that. AC20 is a niche weapon built for close range brawling, gauss is a general weapon that does decent at all ranges.

[Pariah Devalis]

Dakota1000, on 13 September 2016 - 05:27 AM, said:

Gauss rifles were able to be used to brawl with, but an AC20 still would be better in that situation. The AC20 deals 5 more damage per shot, is a ton lighter, has nearly double the damage per second, and if you happen to get the armor stripped on that component the gauss rifle is in its going to go off and possibly take that section with it just about instantly.

The gauss is a nice gun for range, but really its no match for an AC20 in their optimal ranges, infact you'd need two of them against one AC20 to have an advantage, and only a slight one at that. AC20 is a niche weapon built for close range brawling, gauss is a general weapon that does decent at all ranges.

Yes, but no charge gauss is easy to use at a brawl, and actually works beyond 400 meters. If your choice was either: take a weapon that works well at all ranges and generates next to no heat, or take a weapon that only works up close and generates quite a bit of heat, it's a no brainer. Especially since in the vast majority of games, we have no idea what map we will be dropped onto.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 13 September 2016 - 05:31 AM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Pariah Devalis, on 13 September 2016 - 05:30 AM, said:

Yes, but no charge gauss is easy to use at a brawl, and actually works beyond 400 meters. If your choice was either: take a weapon that works well at all ranges and generates next to no heat, or take a weapon that only works up close and generates quite a bit of heat, it's a no brainer. Especially since in the vast majority of games, we have no idea what map we will be dropped onto.

I see it more like the choice between bringing an 8 ERML Nova or a 12 SPL Nova. The ERML have more range and versatility, the 12 SPL commit to a role that the pilot picks and by doing so can beat down things that didn't commit to its role if it gets the chance. I mean that's basically the entire mentality between any brawling loadout, any LRM boat loadout, or any entirely long range weapon loadout. They pick a range and run with it, gauss is a long range weapon, and just like any other long range weapon it has low DPS for its tonnage that gets entirely outclassed if the enemies happen to get you into their range, but its able to attack from both long and short range.

[Pariah Devalis]

Dakota1000, on 13 September 2016 - 05:38 AM, said:

I see it more like the choice between bringing an 8 ERML Nova or a 12 SPL Nova. The ERML have more range and versatility, the 12 SPL commit to a role that the pilot picks and by doing so can beat down things that didn't commit to its role if it gets the chance. I mean that's basically the entire mentality between any brawling loadout, any LRM boat loadout, or any entirely long range weapon loadout. They pick a range and run with it, gauss is a long range weapon, and just like any other long range weapon it has low DPS for its tonnage that gets entirely outclassed if the enemies happen to get you into their range, but its able to attack from both long and short range.

I for one wouldn't bring an ERSLas/SPLas Nova into a pug match outside of scouting 4v4. That asks for problems. The other problem with your Nova comparison is that in that case, the ERMLas nova actually runs significantly hotter, too. If the ERMLas was colder, then there would never be a real reason not to take it.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 13 September 2016 - 05:44 AM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Pariah Devalis, on 13 September 2016 - 05:44 AM, said:

I for one wouldn't bring an ERSLas/SPLas Nova into a pug match outside of scouting 4v4. That asks for problems. The other problem with your Nova comparison is that in that case, the ERMLas nova actually runs significantly hotter, too. If the ERMLas was colder, then there would never be a real reason not to take it.

The ERMLs loadout is colder than the SPL one that I specified. If you max out heatsinks in both cases you have higher heat generation and considerably lower cooling in the SPL boat. I still bring the SPL boat into pug matches often enough and in scouting it often does well even on Polar Highlands and other large maps considering everyone in the IS running a decent loadout has SRMs anymore and the ones who don't just don't have the DPS or alpha to contend.

The reasons to not take the ERML loadout:
Less DPS
Longer beam durations
Less damage per volley

Of course, we should remember that in the case of Gauss vs AC20 the pros and cons of each would be

AC20:
-Higher alpha
-Higher DPS
-Lighter weight
-Higher health
-Doesn't explode

Gauss:
-Higher velocity
-Longer range
-Lower heat
-Ammo doesn't explode

Gauss is more versatile just like the ERML, however when it comes to brawling the AC20 is king just like the small pulse lasers.

[Bishop Steiner]

SmithMPBT, on 12 September 2016 - 02:51 PM, said:

They want you to diversify your loadouts like Battletech was intended. The laserboats most of us have been running, firing alpha after alpha are abominations to table toppers. Lets see how it plays out for a bit before we pull out the pitch forks.

how about torches and the use of other sharp/pokey farming implements?

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Bishop Steiner, on 13 September 2016 - 06:09 AM, said:

how about torches and the use of other sharp/pokey farming implements?

Agromech's when?

[Bud Crue]

CMDR Sunset Shimmer, on 13 September 2016 - 07:08 AM, said:

Agromech's when?

3024 for the CattleMaster. PGI its in the time line! Where is my CattleMaster!?

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/CattleMaster

Its even got a couple of variants. CattleMaster-y pack incoming for sure.

[Baulven]

CMDR Sunset Shimmer, on 13 September 2016 - 07:08 AM, said:

Agromech's when?

I would enjoy an agromech with a single small laser. Run around playing tag.

[Snowbluff]

Pariah Devalis, on 12 September 2016 - 04:36 PM, said:

The multiple hits to the heat capacity of mechs, especially ones forced to use DHS. Like, say... all the omnimechs in the game, currently. Admittedly, I will need to experiment with this, more, but I do not like it. At all.

This pisses me off the most. The CERPPC heat tax is annoying, but not all of my Omnimechs (and most of my Battlemechs, which cost $$$ to revert) use CERPPCs.

[Gyrok]

MauttyKoray, on 12 September 2016 - 05:01 PM, said:

Actually, that's a good chance in most people's opinion who want a game closer to source material. From anything lore, TT, and other game related, weapons seemed to have a 'fire often, but alpha rarely' usage where weapons were more often chosen for the situation they were in and not just smashing your alpha repeatedly. Things like a PPC or large lasers would 'wash the cockpit with a blast of heat' and firing multiple large lasers/PPCs would actually probably have severely heat exhausted the pilot.

I'm all for making a game exactly what it is, a game, but the repeated alpha gameplay is actually a pretty huge issue for the ones that can't. Mechs that can't 'boat' weaponry either in some form of large combination of damage or with the ability to poke repeatedly (small laser boats, PPC boats, LRM boats, etc) tend to fall behind and have to usually use guerrilla tactics or a friendly mech as the bait in order to efficiently deal damage.

Not saying its the entirety but the lack of roles normally found in battletech (scouts, fast hitters, defenders, etc) is part of the problem the game has with a nearly entirely damage centric gameplay.

There is a game coming that accommodates for CBT TT games...it being made by Hare Brained Schemes, and it will be what all the people who want to make this shooter into something else want.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Gyrok, on 13 September 2016 - 07:25 AM, said:

There is a game coming that accommodates for CBT TT games...it being made by Hare Brained Schemes, and it will be what all the people who want to make this shooter into something else want.

Gyrok, stop this crap ok...

Yes, those of us who love Battletech, are well aware of HBS battletech game, but it's not a "Cockpit sim" like MWO.

That's what a TON of us old guard want... we want a cockpit sim, that models out a lot of the tabletop stuff.

Frankly I think 90% of us in the TT/Old Guard scene, would be fine with the imbalances that it could cause, but we want something that buddies up to the ideal of piloting a mech from Tabletop/Fluff... we want heat penalities that matter, we want destroyed critical components like actuators and the like to matter. We want this game to FEEL like Battletech, you know, it's source material.

I LOVE MWO, Gyrok, absolutely love it, BUT, it's not the game I was pitched in 2012, it's not the game I ploped my initial $140 founders bucks on, it's not the game it could have, and should have been.

Part of that is from whiny people on the forums constantly crying about "muh balance", other parts of it is the devs simply seem unable to deliver.

Energy Draw sounded like a bad idea, but as I saw it shape up, it looked like a bit of a return to form for Battletech-esque heat penalties... that's a good thing... But now they're walking back a lot of it, and it's just bloody frustrating.


So yes, HBS is giving us a great looking, almost 1:1 recreation of Battletech on PC soon... that's wonderful, and we'll be playing it like crazy, but it won't be giving us the "in cockpit battletech experience" that MWO could have.

[Widowmaker1981]

CMDR Sunset Shimmer, on 13 September 2016 - 07:43 AM, said:

Gyrok, stop this crap ok...

Yes, those of us who love Battletech, are well aware of HBS battletech game, but it's not a "Cockpit sim" like MWO.

That's what a TON of us old guard want... we want a cockpit sim, that models out a lot of the tabletop stuff.

Frankly I think 90% of us in the TT/Old Guard scene, would be fine with the imbalances that it could cause, but we want something that buddies up to the ideal of piloting a mech from Tabletop/Fluff... we want heat penalities that matter, we want destroyed critical components like actuators and the like to matter. We want this game to FEEL like Battletech, you know, it's source material.

I LOVE MWO, Gyrok, absolutely love it, BUT, it's not the game I was pitched in 2012, it's not the game I ploped my initial $140 founders bucks on, it's not the game it could have, and should have been.

Part of that is from whiny people on the forums constantly crying about "muh balance", other parts of it is the devs simply seem unable to deliver.

Energy Draw sounded like a bad idea, but as I saw it shape up, it looked like a bit of a return to form for Battletech-esque heat penalties... that's a good thing... But now they're walking back a lot of it, and it's just bloody frustrating.


So yes, HBS is giving us a great looking, almost 1:1 recreation of Battletech on PC soon... that's wonderful, and we'll be playing it like crazy, but it won't be giving us the "in cockpit battletech experience" that MWO could have.

The trouble is, the battletech cockpit sim that many seem to want involves lore type builds being optimal which will never be viable in an FPS (due to massively differing control schemes between TT and an FPS), without ridiculous rules that basically completely remove what many of us like about mechwarrrior, namely customisation. Im not saying ED does that, but it also does NOT promote lore builds, at all - and wont make the lore fans happy. The game will still be peek and poke because of core mechanics (cover is indestructible, you only have 1 mech) and to stop it from being that you have to make damage so slow that mistakes are not punished and it becomes impossible for one player to carry, regardless of skill differences.

Basically there are a core of people who will never be happy until they have ruined the game for me and people like me. Its an issue. I think those people would be happiest in a single player mechwarrior sim, but unfortunately one doesnt exist with modern graphics.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 13 September 2016 - 08:23 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Lightfoot, on 12 September 2016 - 08:44 PM, said:

We already do diversify our load-outs, all PGI needs to do is make something other than Lasers work. But oh noes, Gauss Rifle = OP, PPC = OP, AC20 = OP, LRM = OP, SSRM = OP. nerf, nerf, nerf, That's why all the Laser Boats.

You are aware that laser boats are not the cream of the crop anymore right? Why is there so many people who still think laser boats dominate? The best mechs in the game are ER PPC-Gauss or ballistic boats for Heavies and Assaults. Mediums may take advantage of lasers sometimes but typically they are better at SRMs or ER PPC poptarting (HBK 2C). Lights even use SRMs as much as or more than lasers.

Seriously, implying that nothing other than lasers work is a huge sign of ignorance, as they aren't even best anymore.

Widowmaker1981, on 13 September 2016 - 08:22 AM, said:

The trouble is, the battletech cockpit sim that many seem to want involves lore type builds being optimal which will never be viable in an FPS (due to massively differing control schemes between TT and an FPS), without ridiculous rules that basically completely remove what many of us like about mechwarrrior, namely customisation. Im not saying ED does that, but it also does NOT promote lore builds, at all - and wont make the lore fans happy. The game will still be peek and poke because of core mechanics (cover is indestructible, you only have 1 mech) and to stop it from being that you have to make damage so slow that mistakes are not punished and it becomes impossible for one player to carry, regardless of skill differences.

Basically there are a core of people who will never be happy until they have ruined the game for me and people like me. Its an issue. I think those people would be happiest in a single player mechwarrior sim, but unfortunately one doesnt exist with modern graphics.

This plus 50000.

[Hotthedd]

Davegt27, on 12 September 2016 - 08:31 PM, said:

I have herd some of you guys mention TT system but don't go into detail about how it works
anyone want to describe how TT works

from other book case (TT) games weapons rules are based on probability tables (that means what is the likelihood this will happen if this is done)

or lets say your in air to air combat (for example) and you want to fire your weapons there are several look up tables (or rules that must be meet)
like
1) weapons firing arc
2) in range
3) type of weapon
4) radar lock
5) skill modifier
6) type of target

you then roll your dice for each of those what if's
so lets say you roll for radar lock but don't get the die roll you need well you cant fire your weapon

But in this computer game they don't use this system (one of the devs mentioned in another thread about lag, he mentioned predictive!, I found the word predictive surprising)

so the question is would TT (table top) method work when you have 3 mouse buttons to fire all your weapons?

Yes, it could work.
First we must throw out the Straw Man arguments people would use, such as "You can't translate a board game into a FPS."; and "I don't want dice rolls or RNG to determine if I hit or not."

Not every TT variable has to be a program function.
1. Weapons firing arc: This is and would still be entirely up to the player. No programming needed.
2. Range: Again, up to the player. Longer ranges are inherently tougher to hit with anything other than hitscan weapons, but it is more difficult to keep a beam on target for duration at long distances. No programming needed.
3. Type of weapon: Player selected, player controlled. No new programming needed.
4. Radar lock. This did not exist in TT. Keep as is, no new programming needed.
5. (Pilot) skill modifier: 100% up to the player (with some help from the skill tree). No new programming needed.
6. Type of target: Do you mean is the target stationary/moving, and how fast? Again, no new programming needed, as aim is player controlled.

In short, any piloting skill or aiming skill rolls must be left up to the player's control.

Things that would affect the 'MECH's aim and movement however, CAN be approximated.

1. Stationary = most accurate
2. Walking = slight reticle sway
3. Running = more reticle sway
4. Jumping = reticle shake
5. Firing 1 weapon = 100% precision
6. Firing 2 weapons (simultaneously) = slight reticle bloom, 3 weapons = larger bloom, etc.
(To reduce "RNG", the weapons can hit the outside of the reticle at cross hair range at the same relative position as the mounted weapon. i.e. a weapon mounted at 3:00 relative to the cockpit would hit precisely at 3:00 on the edge of the reticle bloom.)

This would approximate the modifiers used in TT, without relying on tables and dice rolls.

Add in a proper heat scale with appropriate effects (removing bandaids and having proper HS dissipation), and you have yourself a nice cockpit sim-light approximation of BattleTech.

Edited by Hotthedd, 13 September 2016 - 09:16 AM.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Widowmaker1981, on 13 September 2016 - 08:22 AM, said:

The trouble is, the battletech cockpit sim that many seem to want involves lore type builds being optimal which will never be viable in an FPS (due to massively differing control schemes between TT and an FPS), without ridiculous rules that basically completely remove what many of us like about mechwarrrior, namely customisation. Im not saying ED does that, but it also does NOT promote lore builds, at all - and wont make the lore fans happy. The game will still be peek and poke because of core mechanics (cover is indestructible, you only have 1 mech) and to stop it from being that you have to make damage so slow that mistakes are not punished and it becomes impossible for one player to carry, regardless of skill differences.

Basically there are a core of people who will never be happy until they have ruined the game for me and people like me. Its an issue. I think those people would be happiest in a single player mechwarrior sim, but unfortunately one doesnt exist with modern graphics.

The thing is, many lore builds, or near lore builds [with minor optimizations] are really not that bad in this game.

The problem is for those of you who like to customize [and trust me I enjoy customization too, just not entirely unfettered customization] there's a desire to absolutely min-max everything. So you get the people who want to fire 4x gauss together, or the rise of the 6PPC stalkers and the like.

People like the instiant gratification... and that's understandable, but that mentality, has lead us to band-aid fix after band-aid fix.

You can do customization that encourages lore-focused builds via sized hardpoints... I've often argued for a +/- 1 "tier" system.

Essentially you classify weapons via a number... for example Medium lasers would be a rank 2. Large Lasers a Rank 3, and a Small Laser Rank 1.

In this example, a laser hardpoint that started with a Medium Laser, could go up to a large, or down to a small... as well as accept side grades such as Pulse variants... However a PPC in this system would be considered rank 4. Which would require a Large Laser having been mounted to that spot prior to the upgrade.

This prevents insane thing's like mounting an AC20 where Machine guns were [looking at the old Catapult K2's from back in the day.] while also opening up the ability for personalizing the mech to your preference, while not destroying it's role on the battlefield.

Minor customization is to be expected in a game like this... after all, pilots often replace parts, especially in merc units [often times it's a downgrade because they didn't have the proper part in stock to fix what was lost] but with the current system, where the only limiting factor is the existing amount of hardpoints on a mech, it allows a player to easily break the system, and make things that make the MW Dark Age Atlas look appealing.