219 replies to this topic

[Accused]

You know, most of this could be solved if we ported these ideas over to the test server.

Let me say that again, a few tweaks to a spreadsheet and port it over to the test server.

I mean, test server. And if it doesn't work, well test server.

[Tombs Clawtooth]

Reading through the OP, it sounds like he's asking for a top down turn based game.

This is a game where people most proficient with their mouse and keyboard win in a heads up fight. Deviating from this would be ridiculous in such a game.

If anything, there's too many random and limiting factors between your mouse and keyboard and the mech you're piloting as it is. Introducing more randomness and more sluggish mechanics would be an exercise in hair pulling frustration for any person who is competent with a mouse and keyboard. If you don't like that type of game, there's plenty of alternatives, but most the mechwarrior games have always been this way.

[Hotthedd]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 12:08 PM, said:

Stop being obtuse, removing the ability to do an alpha with one click IS removing the ability to place effective damage.

I'm not being obtuse, you probably need to clarify your definititions. To me (and the dictionary), "effective" does not have the same meaning as "easy".

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 12:08 PM, said:

Again, effective damage implies with one click, because multiple clicks reduces the effectiveness of that damage.

How does "effective" imply "easy", again? I cannot read your mind.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 12:08 PM, said:

Except it isn't, the idea that small lasers would somehow be ok weapons even without group fire is absolutely ludicrous. Small arms gain the most from group fire, and they still aren't even that great currently compared to larger weapons.

They would be okay for their role. One crit slot, low tonnage and damage short range hitscan DoT weapons. Not 1/6th of a superweapon that has a really low recycle rate.
But if it needed to be adjusted, it could be adjusted without having to worry about what 6 of them magically combined into a death star laser would do.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Hotthedd, on 14 September 2016 - 12:39 PM, said:

I'm not being obtuse, you probably need to clarify your definititions. To me (and the dictionary), "effective" does not have the same meaning as "easy".

How does "effective" imply "easy", again? I cannot read your mind.

Effective and easy go hand in hand in most games. This is the reason hitscan weapons are often so powerful, because they offer a level of reliability (at least in other games, here they are actually more unreliable).

Hotthedd, on 14 September 2016 - 12:39 PM, said:

They would be okay for their role. One crit slot, low tonnage and damage short range hitscan DoT weapons. Not 1/6th of a superweapon that has a really low recycle rate.

Their role would be to sit on the shelf because they would be worthless without significant buffs, because you only magnify its short comings when removing group fire from being a viable option for them.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 14 September 2016 - 12:48 PM.

[Deathlike]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 12:47 PM, said:

Their role would be to sit on the shelf because they would be worthless without significant buffs, because you only magnify its short comings when removing group fire from being a viable option for them.

Yea, there's no reason to run something like a Small Laser unless they were instant. You are better off chain firing Large Lasers over Medium Lasers since you would be capable of firing the highest damage option while spending the least time staring at your target.

Then again, you'd just be better off chain firing AC20s instead of AC10s for obvious reasons.

Edited by Deathlike, 14 September 2016 - 12:53 PM.

[Myantra]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 12:47 PM, said:

Effective and easy go hand in hand in most games. This is the reason hitscan weapons are often so powerful, because they offer a level of reliability (at least in other games, here they are actually more unreliable).

That right there is really the only reason that anything other than lasers makes sense to use at all.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Myantra, on 14 September 2016 - 12:57 PM, said:

That right there is really the only reason that anything other than lasers makes sense to use at all.

If hit reg worked correctly, lasers would definitely need to be looked at.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 14 September 2016 - 12:58 PM.

[Hotthedd]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 12:47 PM, said:

Effective and easy go hand in hand in most games. This is the reason hitscan weapons are often so powerful, because they offer a level of reliability (at least in other games, here they are actually more unreliable).

Thanks for the honesty.
You want the easiest way to play the game.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 12:47 PM, said:

Their role would be to sit on the shelf because they would be worthless without significant buffs, because you only magnify its short comings when removing group fire from being a viable option for them.

Light 'mechs would still have a use for them. Of course it would be more difficult to core out the rear CT of an assault, as it would take more than one or two clicks...
...but like you said, it wouldn't be easy.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Hotthedd, on 14 September 2016 - 01:20 PM, said:

Thanks for the honesty.
You want the easiest way to play the game.

Wow, went straight for the strawman

No, I want long range and small arms to be relevant/effective, if that means easier, then so be it.

Hotthedd, on 14 September 2016 - 01:20 PM, said:

Light 'mechs would still have a use for them.

They don't have use of them now (SPLs are a bit different mind you), what makes you think this would magically change that? If I have to chain fire weapons I'm much more likely to just strap on a PPC and avoid lasers or avoid playing lights period.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 14 September 2016 - 02:45 PM.

[badaa]

changes to the game that don't involve pinpoint & convergence mean nothing

its been shown time and again that any new or old mechanic can and is easily bypassed

[Hotthedd]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 02:43 PM, said:

Wow, went straight for the strawman

No straw man, you straight up admitted you meant "easy" when you used "effective" as the euphamism.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 02:43 PM, said:

No, I want long range and small arms to be relevant/effective, if that means easier, then so be it.

So, you admit it, again.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 02:43 PM, said:

They don't have use of them now (SPLs are a bit different mind you), what makes you think this would magically change that? If I have to chain fire weapons I'm much more likely to just strap on a PPC and avoid lasers or avoid playing lights period.

To each their own. Bigger weapons would have the advantage of higher damage to one component. It is a good thing they are already balanced by tonnage and heat

[dervishx5]

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Hotthedd, on 14 September 2016 - 03:07 PM, said:

No straw man, you straight up admitted you meant "easy" when you used "effective" as the euphamism.

So, you admit it, again.

Saying I want the game to be easy and wanting effective/easy alternatives are two very different things. If this game were easy more people would be good at it.

Hotthedd, on 14 September 2016 - 03:07 PM, said:

To each their own. Bigger weapons would have the advantage of higher damage to one component. It is a good thing they are already balanced by tonnage and heat

It's a good thing they are already good without removing group fire...

[Hotthedd]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 03:38 PM, said:

Saying I want the game to be easy and wanting effective/easy alternatives are two very different things. If this game were easy more people would be good at it.

Way to cherry pick a defense. Okay, I'll play. You want aiming and dealing damage to be easy. Better?
If the game were harder, perhaps many people would find out that they aren't as good as they think? The truth is, teamwork and positioning, torso twisting, etc. will still separate the wheat from the chaff.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 03:38 PM, said:

It's a good thing they are already good without removing group fire...

They are better than good when they can be combined to point-n-click once to expose internals.

[Sable]

This whole thread is dumb... It's like you've ignored everything they've tried back in beta up until now. Stuff didn't work for a reason so they had to change it. Thats why armor values are double. DUR... comprehension...

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Hotthedd, on 14 September 2016 - 03:44 PM, said:

The truth is, teamwork and positioning, torso twisting, etc. will still separate the wheat from the chaff.

Which it already does, aiming doesn't need to be hard to do this, especially since it potentially limits viable strats and play styles (mainly being burst damage) without changing basically the entire design of this game so that the burst damage is still as powerful as it is currently, you are just using fewer guns at a time to do it.

Hotthedd, on 14 September 2016 - 03:44 PM, said:

They are better than good when they can be combined to point-n-click once to expose internals.

So why nerf small arms when they aren't even good to begin with?

[Hotthedd]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 04:45 PM, said:

Which it already does, aiming doesn't need to be hard to do this, especially since it potentially limits viable strats and play styles (mainly being burst damage) without changing basically the entire design of this game so that the burst damage is still as powerful as it is currently, you are just using fewer guns at a time to do it.

What viable strat and/or play style is limited? Dual Gauss snipers/ERPPC snipers? KDK-3 Dakka boats? Why? Because they would have to hit their target more than once?
The design of the game isn't being radically changed, the mechanics would remain almost unchanged.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 14 September 2016 - 04:45 PM, said:

So why nerf small arms when they aren't even good to begin with?

No body is talking about a nerf to small arms, and I did not say they weren't already good. Taking away the ability to combine small weapons into big weapons is not a nerf, its a fix.

You want easy mode, you have easy mode. Relax.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Accused, on 14 September 2016 - 12:13 PM, said:

You know, most of this could be solved if we ported these ideas over to the test server.

Let me say that again, a few tweaks to a spreadsheet and port it over to the test server.

I mean, test server. And if it doesn't work, well test server.

you mean preview server

And I cant find it but theres a funny quote from russ or bryan on how they dont want mwo to be "spreadsheet warrior"

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Hotthedd, on 14 September 2016 - 05:21 PM, said:

What viable strat and/or play style is limited?

Extreme and long range, because of the inability to land precise shots, why not just close the gap and dakka each other's faces off.

Hotthedd, on 14 September 2016 - 05:21 PM, said:

The design of the game isn't being radically changed, the mechanics would remain almost unchanged.

Except it would be, removing the ability to land precise group fire shots impacts what weapons are good and what strats are actually viable.

Hotthedd, on 14 September 2016 - 05:21 PM, said:

No body is talking about a nerf to small arms, and I did not say they weren't already good. Taking away the ability to combine small weapons into big weapons is not a nerf, its a fix.

It's a nerf....their balance relationship to other weapons is made worse by the inability to group fire....

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 14 September 2016 - 05:34 PM.

[Nastyogre]

Sable, on 14 September 2016 - 04:27 PM, said:

This whole thread is dumb... It's like you've ignored everything they've tried back in beta up until now. Stuff didn't work for a reason so they had to change it. Thats why armor values are double. DUR... comprehension...

Nice non-constructive insult. DUR, manners/ meaningful discussion. Certainly I didn't ignore it, I was there for it. The point is they STARTED with an assumption that doesn't work well, firing cycles too fast and near perfect convergence. Fix that and other things aren't necessary.

Seriously if you can't do more than this, go back to your mom's basement and watch anime.