Jump to content

Please Drop Velocity Quirks


24 replies to this topic

#21 Quicksilver Kalasa

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Professional
  • The Professional
  • 10,744 posts
  • LocationKansas City, MO

Posted 11 October 2016 - 09:48 PM

View PostKoniving, on 11 October 2016 - 03:36 PM, said:

If you balance the 'better' feature with an equally 'inferior' feature, the superiority will be situational rather than absolute.

Weapons fulfill a specific role, if weapon balance is good, there should be no really good well-rounded weapon, whatever combo of buffs/debuffs helps accomplish that role the best will be the better weapon. Only weapons that fulfill multiple roles will actually allow for truly balanced manufacturer variants. I'd rather see new equipment before manufacturer based weapons simply because that actually adds more unique roles that are currently vacant weapon wise.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 11 October 2016 - 09:49 PM.


#22 Miles McQuiston

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 145 posts

Posted 12 October 2016 - 05:59 AM

Just fix harpoint size and constrain the mechlab. Fixes all the boating ED etc..

Edited by Miles McQuiston, 12 October 2016 - 06:06 AM.


#23 GweNTLeR

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • IS Exemplar
  • IS Exemplar
  • 350 posts

Posted 12 October 2016 - 06:47 AM

View PostRampage, on 06 October 2016 - 05:08 AM, said:



You mount a 50 caliber machine gun in the bed of a Toyota pick-up truck and it fires exactly the same as a 50 caliber machine gun mounted on top of a M1 Abrams tank. The vehicles do not handle anything alike but if you are shooting the machine gun they shoot exactly the same. You have to learn to drive the tank rather than the truck. Now, transpose that example into MWO and two different Mech chassis, one with weapon velocity quirks and one without. Is it reasonable or does it really add something to the game that you have to relearn how to fire the exact same weapon in addition to the speed and agility of the chassis that you are using? IMO, no.

I can see their point about velocity quirks that affect weapons when mounted on different chassis.

Actually, according to sarna, similar class AC's might have different caliber:
An example of the rating system: the Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm weapon firing ten shells per "round" while the Chemjet Gun is a 185mm weapon firing much slower, and causing higher damage per shell. Despite their differences, both are classified as Autocannon/20s due to their damage output.
So actually, if you consider the fact that different mechs have different weapon manufacturers, you may find it just for some mechs to have velocity or other quirks.

Edited by GweNTLeR, 12 October 2016 - 06:49 AM.


#24 Y E O N N E

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Nimble
  • The Nimble
  • 16,206 posts

Posted 13 October 2016 - 07:54 PM

View PostQuicksilver Kalasa, on 11 October 2016 - 09:48 PM, said:

Weapons fulfill a specific role, if weapon balance is good, there should be no really good well-rounded weapon, whatever combo of buffs/debuffs helps accomplish that role the best will be the better weapon. Only weapons that fulfill multiple roles will actually allow for truly balanced manufacturer variants. I'd rather see new equipment before manufacturer based weapons simply because that actually adds more unique roles that are currently vacant weapon wise.


Plasma Rifles!

#25 Huron Fal

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sureshot
  • The Sureshot
  • 133 posts

Posted 26 October 2016 - 08:35 AM

View PostPitchBlackYeti, on 04 October 2016 - 05:49 AM, said:

I have a better idea, drop all weapon quirks so weapons can be balanced properly again and not nerfed to oblivion because of one overquirked chassis. Structure/armor/movement quirks are perfectly fine to serve as a chassis balancing method.


I agree, though it would take months to implement that sort of sweeping balance change (sadly)





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users