137 replies to this topic

[Y E O N N E]

Pastor Priest, on 27 October 2016 - 07:10 AM, said:

Unfortunately, your first point harkens to a different, and arguably bigger, issue. High PPFLD due to convergence and high heat caps makes TTK too high.

Not even necessarily that complicated. If all ACs fired streams, all lasers had longer burns, and SRMs/PPCs had lower rates of fire, you could reasonably reduce the agility on 'Mechs because the damage rate to any given component is lower.

[Johnny Z]

Slightly slower all around would be an improvement. Balance isn't to bad now. Not faster that is for sure.

Edited by Johnny Z, 27 October 2016 - 07:27 AM.

[DaZur]

Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky, on 27 October 2016 - 07:16 AM, said:

I was under the impression that each weight class had its own accel/decel profile... So even if you could get an assault mech to be the same speed as a fast heavy, the assault mech would still be less agile...

Yes and no... In general, this is true to a degree. Problem arises when let's say you have an assault with a higher engine cap AND has an aggressive agility profile, you wind up with a mech that is not only disproportionate to it's class but encroaching upon the lesser class advantage. Right now both the Kodiak and the Timber are two mechs that come to mind that have this situation. (Not intentionally picking on Clan mechs FYI)

[Rayden Wolf]

Yeonne Greene, on 27 October 2016 - 07:21 AM, said:

Not even necessarily that complicated. If all ACs fired streams, all lasers had longer burns, and SRMs/PPCs had lower rates of fire, you could reasonably reduce the agility on 'Mechs because the damage rate to any given component is lower.

And suddenly a Jenner IIC with 6SRM appear.
The assaults and heavys have to be that agile to deal with lights. They circle way to tight at fullspeed. Thats why everything else have to get buffed mobility.

[Davegt27]

I would not slow down (meaning agility) any Mechs

I don't have near enough Mechs to be a good judge but I think the KDK is the best Mech in the game not because of its fire power
but because of its agility

I can stay with almost any light in a brawl, I might not get him/her but at least I have a fighting chance

this is the fun factor of the game and the balance factor that can make the game more fun

[DaZur]

Rayden Wolf, on 27 October 2016 - 07:36 AM, said:

And suddenly a Jenner IIC with 6SRM appear.
The assaults and heavys have to be that agile to deal with lights. They circle way to tight at fullspeed. Thats why everything else have to get buffed mobility.

This is why there should be a speed-to-turn-radium ratio that translates speed into forward momentum. Short and sweet: Faster you go = wider your turn radius. Slower you go = tighter your turn radius.

Right now, folks just firewall their throttle with no consideration.

But now we're talking adding "simulation qualities" to the game and the "pew-pew" crowd can't be bothered with these nuances.

[Deathlike]

Yeonne Greene, on 27 October 2016 - 07:21 AM, said:

Not even necessarily that complicated. If all ACs fired streams, all lasers had longer burns, and SRMs/PPCs had lower rates of fire, you could reasonably reduce the agility on 'Mechs because the damage rate to any given component is lower.

Usually stuff like PPC+Gauss isn't really that super dependent on ROF (unless you reduce heat+cooldowns to a point where they are fired at some silly rate) and even the SRM splat on a Jenner-IIC (not so much Oxide) is still limited by heat (it is possible to have the old Huginn ROF with a meh amount of SRMs being splatted and still not be incredible... except for those potatoes that whined about that gimmick...)

There is a point where not enough agility can reduce the effectiveness of torso twisting.

[Rayden Wolf]

DaZur, on 27 October 2016 - 07:42 AM, said:

This is why there should be a speed-to-turn-radium ratio that translates speed into forward momentum. Short and sweet: Faster you go = wider your turn radius. Slower you go = tighter your turn radius.

Right now, folks just firewall their throttle with no consideration.

But now we're talking adding "simulation qualities" to the game and the "pew-pew" crowd can't be bothered with these nuances.

I totaly agree^^

[rolly]

DaZur, on 27 October 2016 - 07:42 AM, said:

Right now, folks just firewall their throttle with no consideration.

But now we're talking adding "simulation qualities" to the game and the "pew-pew" crowd can't be bothered with these nuances.

Exactly. Running full tilt at 120+ kmph at a solid rock face with a bi-pedal 20-30 ton mech (the average weight of a DUMP TRUCK) and nothing happens to its legs, no need for piloting or skill to use the legs effectively.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

DaZur, on 27 October 2016 - 07:35 AM, said:

Problem arises when let's say you have an assault with a higher engine cap AND has an aggressive agility profile

These go hand in hand. Using your examples, neither has agility quirks but both are agile because agility is tied strictly to speed, it is the reason the Adder had the same level of agility as the Stormcrow originally. Agility being tied to speed has been a problem since day one, it is part of the reason STD engines are so weak right now.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 27 October 2016 - 08:06 AM.

[dario03]

Depends on the mech. And in comparison to everything else. Like the Locust is decently agile but other lights like the Firestarter and Jenner IIc are not since they do not have agility quirks but a lot of assaults and heavies do. So you could either remove/reduce the agility quirks on the bigger mechs or give a lot of agility quirks to lights or a mix.
Or if looking at just the same weight then mechs like the Kodiak are capable of being to agile compared to other mechs. Sure you have to use tonnage with a larger engine but a lot of builds allow for Endo and even Ferro which the Dire can not do. So you could put 5-8.2t toward the engine without really giving up much. And that is enough tonnage to go from a 300 to a 360. So the Dire should have better quirks than the Kodiak. Or the Kodiak (3 mostly) needs negative quirks. And of course the IS 100t mechs have to use standard engines or possibly die from a st loss.

Edited by dario03, 27 October 2016 - 08:24 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Deathlike, on 27 October 2016 - 07:44 AM, said:

Usually stuff like PPC+Gauss isn't really that super dependent on ROF (unless you reduce heat+cooldowns to a point where they are fired at some silly rate) and even the SRM splat on a Jenner-IIC (not so much Oxide) is still limited by heat (it is possible to have the old Huginn ROF with a meh amount of SRMs being splatted and still not be incredible... except for those potatoes that whined about that gimmick...)

There is a point where not enough agility can reduce the effectiveness of torso twisting.

The impact of rate of fire on PPC/Gauss is heavily dependent upon map size, both teams being equal. The smaller the map, the more you need to keep the pressure up, the more a low rate of fire hurts you. Even on a larger map, though, a lower rate of fire allows you to more readily move up because the gaps between shots are longer and the total damage received in the crossing is less.

The reason I mention both SRMs and PPCs is that if we reduce the rate of damage out as I mentioned above for lasers and ballistics, it makes them pretty much useless against either unless they get smacked with a change, too.


Your last point echoes what I said in my first post in the thread. =/

[Summon3r]

heavies are to good at everything.

assualts are to shite at everything

at least thats how it felt 10 months ago

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Summon3r, on 27 October 2016 - 08:21 AM, said:

heavies are to good at everything.

assualts are to shite at everything

at least thats how it felt 10 months ago

Then you've been doing it wrong for the past 10 months. While the era of the Mauler wasn't nearly as dominant as the Whale or Kodiak eras, it was still enough that made most other mechs look bad. Assaults have been dominant for a long time now, pretty much since after the brawl meta when the Catapult stopped being the most important mech on the field.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 27 October 2016 - 08:31 AM.

[razenWing]

Whenever I think of Direwolf, I think of this:

http://zoids.wikia.c...iki/Ultrasaurus

The problem is the current game designers are not imaginative enough to jump out of the lore TT mode of thinking that came out in the 80s.

Let's say Direwolf have an inherent 20% aim assistance, meaning... 20% easier time to target. Now it's totally legit for the Direwolf to have no mobility. Or if it's like a siege engine like the Ultrasaurus. Should Direwolf not carry AoE weapons by all stretch of the imagination?

But alas, it carries the same carry weapon package universally designed for everyone else. Reason? Lore.

But enough rant of Direwolf. In terms of mobility, I like the MWO setup. It's probably the best piloting mech game in not just the franchise, but in the entire genre. (Of course, this is a little biased as Mech3 is more about lag compensation which really nullifies any mobility issues. Or else, I would probably take the mech movement of mech3 over MWO)

[LordKnightFandragon]

All the mechs, including lights move far, the hell to fast.

Go get in like a Mauler or Atlas, THATS how heavy and assaults should handle, while a Warhawk is about how the mediums and lights should handle. Not top speed, but traverse rates. No, no guys, mechs dont turn instantly like in this game, where lights can flail the torsos back and forth and back and forth like a kid on oversweetened Koolaid.

The Light mech's would turn about like an M1A1's turret/hull, that is about 6 seconds to traverse 360 degrees. Plus, turning the legs on a light mech, if it could turn as fast in RL as it does in this game, it would trip the **** over its own legs, just try turning in RL like the mechs do in this game

THATS how mechs should move.

JUst watch any of the Mech game intros, including the MW5 intro, it displays very clearly how mechs should move....MWO has it sooooooo ***** wrong...EVERYTHING moves wwwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy to ***** fast.

Edited by LordKnightFandragon, 27 October 2016 - 08:37 AM.

[GrimRiver]

Too agile? Yes, very much yes.

Too many people think ALL mediums need to go 90kph and then they wonder why assaults get left behind 80% of the time.

Yes, it's nice to have a fast mech but whats the point if it makes your otherwise tanky mech die from a single ST loss just to get a little extra speed and weight(If you're running IS).

[Deathlike]

Yeonne Greene, on 27 October 2016 - 08:19 AM, said:

The impact of rate of fire on PPC/Gauss is heavily dependent upon map size, both teams being equal. The smaller the map, the more you need to keep the pressure up, the more a low rate of fire hurts you. Even on a larger map, though, a lower rate of fire allows you to more readily move up because the gaps between shots are longer and the total damage received in the crossing is less.

The reason I mention both SRMs and PPCs is that if we reduce the rate of damage out as I mentioned above for lasers and ballistics, it makes them pretty much useless against either unless they get smacked with a change, too.


Your last point echoes what I said in my first post in the thread. =/

There's also considerations to projectile/missile speed as well.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

LordKnightFandragon, on 27 October 2016 - 08:36 AM, said:

while a Warhawk is about how the mediums and lights should handle.

So you want mediums and lights to be super worthless? The Mauler is still probably the second strongest assault and still one of the strongest mechs in the game and you want to nerf its competitors in the lighter weight classes, just lol.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 27 October 2016 - 08:49 AM.

[1453 R]

A certain base level of mobility is required for all 'Mechs.

The people who want assault 'Mechs to take ninety seconds to turn a hundred and eighty degrees whilst at zero throttle are never going to get their wish, for balance reasons as much as anything else. However much you want to rag on folks who like fun for NOT BEING SIM ENUFF, we're already at a point in the game where most assault 'Mechs are suboptimal choices compared to heavy 'Mechs for reasons of the Fatbro Shuffle. Newer heavies, and even some older heavies, can bring enough dakka to kill whatever they like up to and including fatbros, and they don't pay nearly the premium in mobility that a similarly kill-y fatbro does.

Crippling all assault 'Mech's movement profiles because light 'Mech pilots have had bad experiences, or because IT FEELS MOR SIM, further squeezes out the class. Even with heavy 'Mechs also taking a penalty, it would force more emphasis on the already overplayed heavy classification because they would still be the best mix of mobility, durability, and killing power you can bring to a match.

Light 'mechs do not deserve to be impervious to assault machines. Heavies don't need any more emphasis than they already have. 'Mechs that are too slow, clumsy, and impossible to keep on target are no fun to play no matter how much (theoretical) killing power they have - exhibit A: Dire Whale.

Decoupling engine rating from mobility, the way many suggest, means we all immediately jump back to the Bad Old Days of the toaster pastry - not in that everyone will pop their tarts, but in that everyone will use the absolute smallest engine they can possibly get away with in order to fit more damage on their machine. Matches will become very slow and static because there would no longer be even the possibility of creating a machine designed to outmaneuver your enemies rather than simply out-hammer them. Clan machines would actually be 'over-engined', paying huge premiums in weight for engine ratings that no longer provide them any kind of advantage. Taking a larger engine will become something you do only as an option of final desperation, or because there is no other possible way to spend your weight cap. Fast brawlers will disappear because they now have to pay a dozen tons for footspeed and footspeed alone - not twist advantages, not acceleration advantages, not any other type of mobility at all, butjust. Raw. Footspeed - that their targets can spend on a fifth Gauss Rifle, instead.

To say nothing of 'Mechs within a class that are specifically and intentionally designed for 'abnormal' mobility profiles for their class, a'la Linebackers, Gargoyles, Victors, or other 'faster than they should be' 'Mechs. Which will become strictly and irreparably inferior to regular machines of their classification if the advantages of mobility they pay a disastrous tax for are stripped from them. Those machines would disappear from the face of the earth, whilst the kneecapped-gunbag style machines such as Night Gyrs would become even more crushingly dominant than they frequently are as they don't lose anything, but their more agile competition has now lost the edge in agility they depended on when faced with a machine with twice their native firepower. Congratulations - you will never see a Timber Wolf again because it will have no advantage whatsoever over the Night Gyr outside of, potentially, some weird hardpoint combination or other the Gyr can't do.

Does any of this sound like a great idea to people? Because it sure as hell sounds like an utterly awful idea to me.