129 replies to this topic

[Cold Darkness]

well, its not exactly a new idea, and i suspect that it will be instantly shot down by the very same people that always whine about the very idea of it, but let me try yet again, this time with the XL engine issue as a basis to make the idea of it more appealing.

if one thinks about it, the one thing that makes IS XL that much worse then C XL is the overall weaponaccuracy. if weapons where less accurate, rolling damage would be much easier and even without active shielding, xl mechs would be much less fragile compared to the current game.
as a bonus point, it would also buff light mechs and the smaller mediums, which a majority of forumites seems to agree are to weak in the current metagame.

the way i see it, ANY mechanic to reduce accuracy would be a helpful addition to the game. i also do understand the argument that people feel like they should always have absolute accuracy at their hand, because pvp usually feels bad with big rng involved. but BIG deviations are not required to implement such a mechanic. SMALL deviations would allready bring BIG results, without feeling punishing.

anyways, since it is very unlikely that pgi splits with battletech on the armor values for each component to give more incentives to destroying specific parts to weaken enemys instead of straight up removing them asap, there is also no real reason for perfect accuracy to be in the game, because the added strategic layer it would offer is not utilised.

so, lets discuss this. again.

[Sjorpha]

So reduce the accuracy of clan weapons then, or globally?

If you reduce global accuracy you make clan and IS XL even more unbalanced, because reduced accuracy buffs the durability of both of them, and it actually buffs the durability of clan XL and std engines more, because they get the added time to take out a side torso x2, twice as much increase to TTK for them.

Reducing clan accuracy would improve balance for Faction Warfare, but not for quickplay, so it's probabaly a bad idea.

At some point the tech itself must be balanced, it's the only sensible approach.

Edited by Sjorpha, 22 January 2017 - 04:55 AM.

[Cold Darkness]

of all weapons actually. if youd reduce only clanweapon accuracy, it would just lead to the current situation in reverse.

[Sjorpha]

Cold Darkness, on 22 January 2017 - 04:53 AM, said:

of all weapons actually. if youd reduce only clanweapon accuracy, it would just lead to the current situation in reverse.

If you reduce global accuracy you make clan and IS XL even more unbalanced, because reduced accuracy buffs the durability of of clan XL and std engines more, because they get whatever the added average time to take out a side torso is x2, twice as much increase to TTK for them

[Cold Darkness]

the big issue the is xl engine has is that can drill right through it, which you would not be able to do if the you lowered the accuracy. once you are unable to do so, is XL mechs are VERY CLOSE to clan XL mechs. the one thing id worry about is how STANDARD engines fare with such changes. because those could get VERY hard to destroy.

i understand what you are trying to say with your argument, however, to me it looks like you simply multiply sidetorsohealth by weaponinaccuracy, which is not how it works.

[Mechteric]

Cone of Fire is the term you are looking for. The way the title is worded is confusing and seems to suggest something else.

[Besh]

I swear this is a conpsiracy .

This guy will shake the tree until he gets his cone of fire solution, then phone his "AutoAim in MW:O" buddies on a scrambled connection : "Guys, MY part of ze Mission = completed!". THEY will promptly start to campaign to take actual aiming out of the Game . The "recently introduced cone of fire related inaccuracy of all ze weppons" being there prime argument .

XD

Edited by Besh, 22 January 2017 - 06:57 AM.

[Snowbluff]

Sage

Cold Darkness, on 22 January 2017 - 04:53 AM, said:

of all weapons actually. if youd reduce only clanweapon accuracy, it would just lead to the current situation in reverse.

Clan weapons are already more inaccurate. The missiles spread more, the lasers have longer durations, and the autocannons fire in bursts.

[Widowmaker1981]

nevermind

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 22 January 2017 - 07:51 AM.

[Mystere]

How about considerably expanding the balancing ecosystem instead?

Mystere, on 30 October 2016 - 08:29 PM, said:

Is this the right time to say that balance should be based on at least all of the following instead of just the first two?

• Mechs
  
• weapons
  
• equipment
  
• forced IS vs. IS, Clan vs. Clan, and IS vs. Clan
  
• maps
  
• numbers
  
• tonnage
  
• game modes
  
• victory conditions
  
• rewards

Or does everyone still stubbornly insist on the current boneheaded course of action being taken, which has failed in the last four years or so?

[Sjorpha]

Cold Darkness, on 22 January 2017 - 05:16 AM, said:

i understand what you are trying to say with your argument, however, to me it looks like you simply multiply sidetorsohealth by weaponinaccuracy, which is not how it works.

For the purpose of calculating time-to-kill-by-ST-destruction it is pretty much exactly how it works. Now obviously in practice you don't have 2X the total TTK on clan mechs, because there are 3 other ways to kill a mech and you have to factior in the reduction in power form the first ST loss, but that doesn't change the fact that your change buffs the clan XL considerably more than it buffs the IS XL.

Your change is a relative nerf to the IS XL, since it buffs all other engines in the game much more.

Not to say I'm against reducing accuracy a bit in MWO, a dynamic CoF system that required taking speed and other things into account to land accurate shots would be awesome, but it wouldn't improve the engine balance, you still have to make the engines equally good somehow.

Mystere, on 22 January 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

How about considerably expanding the balancing ecosystem instead?

Until you explain how to actually do each of those bullet points it's just useless posturing.

Edited by Sjorpha, 22 January 2017 - 07:51 AM.

[cazidin]

Because nerfing Clans is the right idea for balance! Let's keep doing that. This can't possibly lead to a dumpster fire of epic proportions on Forum Isle.

[Mystere]

Sjorpha, on 22 January 2017 - 07:49 AM, said:

Until you explain how to actually do each of those bullet points it's just useless posturing.

Your wish is my command ... but only this one time.
...
Heck, I'll give you another
....
Blah! Here's one more.

Now you go find the rest. Treat it as an Easter egg hunt.

Edited by Mystere, 22 January 2017 - 08:09 AM.

[cazidin]

Mystere, on 22 January 2017 - 08:09 AM, said:

Your wish is my command ... but only this one time.
...
Heck, I'll give you another
....
Blah! Here's one more.

Now you go find the rest. Treat it as an Easter egg hunt.

Did he just waste his 3 wishes for Forum Links?

[Sjorpha]

Mystere, on 22 January 2017 - 08:09 AM, said:

Your wish is my command ... but only this one time.
...
Heck, I'll give you another
....
Blah! Here's one more.

Now you go find the rest. Treat it as an Easter egg hunt.

Thanks.

It seems the balance part in most of those ideas are based on uneven team sizes and such, I don't see that as constructive since PGI said it was off the table, but thanks for sharing.

[Mystere]

Sjorpha, on 22 January 2017 - 08:40 AM, said:

Thanks.

It seems the balance part in most of those ideas are based on uneven team sizes and such, I don't see that as constructive since PGI said it was off the table, but thanks for sharing.

But what MWO lacks, among other things of course, is variety, immersion, flavor. With one exception, eveything is 12vs12. It's almost all Skirmish, just with different names. There is no actual "BattleTech" beyond names and general shapes.

As for being off the table, weren't 3PV and coolant flush also off the table too.

Edited by Mystere, 22 January 2017 - 08:48 AM.

[Sjorpha]

Mystere, on 22 January 2017 - 08:47 AM, said:

As for being off the table, weren't 3PV and coolant flush also off the table too.

That was then.

You have to take into account that this game is getting pretty old by now, we're not looking at the kind of development window and uncertainty that a new game has. I think we're looking at tweaks and fixes at best at this point, not big redesigns and changes in direction.

I agree immersion and flavor etc is lacking, I don't think uneven team sizes would bring any of that though. I don't see any lore value in deliberate imbalance.

Edited by Sjorpha, 22 January 2017 - 09:07 AM.

[Cold Darkness]

so, lets clean this up a bit.

cazidin, on 22 January 2017 - 08:08 AM, said:

Because nerfing Clans is the right idea for balance! Let's keep doing that. This can't possibly lead to a dumpster fire of epic proportions on Forum Isle.

you didnt read anything in this thread, did you?

Mystere, on 22 January 2017 - 07:44 AM, said:

How about considerably expanding the balancing ecosystem instead?

how about keeping change suggestions on a very basic level with high effects. this way you have an actual chance on achieving something that may even be considered to be useful for the game. because investment vs payout is a thing.
of course one can use alot more things to balance things properly, but if they had the ressources to spare for that, they would have done so allready.

Snowbluff, on 22 January 2017 - 07:09 AM, said:

Clan weapons are already more inaccurate. The missiles spread more, the lasers have longer durations, and the autocannons fire in bursts.

exactly, this is one of the major options that can be made use of. by increasing burntimes with smaller damage ticks for lasers, more spread on srm/lbx/lrm, more projectiles with uacs and possibly cof or much slower projectiles on gauss/ac/ppc across the board on ALL weapons, alot of issues with the game could be solved. the big offenders that could actually be problematic would obviously be the single projectile weapons.

CapperDeluxe, on 22 January 2017 - 05:27 AM, said:

Cone of Fire is the term you are looking for. The way the title is worded is confusing and seems to suggest something else.

as other people mentioned allready, cof is not the only way to make weapons less accurate. there are the current mechanics as stated above, as well as the past convergence (which is most likely not comming back because of hsr or something) as well as the often suggested static torso hardpoints. there are alot more possibilitys to achieve the goal without actually going into rng-based solutions. not that id mind it if cof would be an endresult. like i said, im fine with any decent mechanic if it gets the job done

Besh, on 22 January 2017 - 06:56 AM, said:

I swear this is a conpsiracy .

This guy will shake the tree until he gets his cone of fire solution, then phone his "AutoAim in MW:O" buddies on a scrambled connection : "Guys, MY part of ze Mission = completed!". THEY will promptly start to campaign to take actual aiming out of the Game . The "recently introduced cone of fire related inaccuracy of all ze weppons" being there prime argument .

XD

if i wanted to take actual aiming out of a shooter i would simply suggest to port it to a random console, that would solve the problem alltogether since controlers are unsuited equipment for fps which is usually adressed by adding more or less ridiculous "aiming assist" into console fps.

yes, i am aware that you tried to make a joke. it just wasnt funny.

Sjorpha, on 22 January 2017 - 07:49 AM, said:

For the purpose of calculating time-to-kill-by-ST-destruction it is pretty much exactly how it works. Now obviously in practice you don't have 2X the total TTK on clan mechs, because there are 3 other ways to kill a mech and you have to factior in the reduction in power form the first ST loss, but that doesn't change the fact that your change buffs the clan XL considerably more than it buffs the IS XL.

Your change is a relative nerf to the IS XL, since it buffs all other engines in the game much more.

Not to say I'm against reducing accuracy a bit in MWO, a dynamic CoF system that required taking speed and other things into account to land accurate shots would be awesome, but it wouldn't improve the engine balance, you still have to make the engines equally good somehow.

lets keep this simple.
in an ideal world, the mechs would end up more or less stripped at the end anyways. the argument is obviously that this is HARDER TO DO with an IS xl mech. once you get past the point of reliably instakilling the IS XL mech, it is virtually as robust as a clanmech, given slight structurequirks on the side torsos (read: the current ones are propably good enough to achieve that goal or might even be to much on some mechs).
i am aware that not every battle will turn out like that, because not every player has equal skill in twisting vs aiming. however, id like to point out, that the issue is mostly in the above average players, because the average players aim bad enough to strip your mech even when you arent twisting at all. sounds harsh, but you know that its propably true even for many tier 1 players.

id really like a dynamic cof, though. even though that will most likely hit deaf ears. again.

[Sjorpha]

Cold Darkness, on 22 January 2017 - 12:28 PM, said:

in an ideal world, the mechs would end up more or less stripped at the end anyways. the argument is obviously that this is HARDER TO DO with an IS xl mech. once you get past the point of reliably instakilling the IS XL mech, it is virtually as robust as a clanmech, given slight structurequirks on the side torsos (read: the current ones are propably good enough to achieve that goal or might even be to much on some mechs).

Well this is where you are wrong, it wouldn't be virtually as robust as a clanmech because the clanmech would gain even more extra TTK from the increasing spread of fire than the IS mech would. It would take longer to kill the IS mech and even more longer to kill the Clan mech. In essence, mechs would start dying later in the match, which would make it seem more balanced up until that point, but that isn't the same as improving balance, quite the opposite. What would happen after that point in the match, when everyone is down to internals from evenly spread damage, is that IS mechs would start dying while Clan mechs start losing their side torsos. Guess who wins?

You also have to understand that even with SRMs good players are currently hitting and destroying the component they want with very high reliability. I don't know how much you propose the accuracy reduction to be, but in order to even reduce the reliability of XL checking in the first place you need weapons to be less accurate that the current ASRMS, and it needs to be much less accurate than SRMs at all ranges, otherwise you would simply be pushing the game into a new close range meta where everyone would be fightning close enough to hit STs reliably and only the best close range weapons are competitive. Think about that. Not only will it never fly, but I wouldn't be interested in playing such a game either.

There is such a simple solution, just make the IS XL equally good as the Clan XL. There is no need to bend over backwards with obfuscation, ideas you know will not happen and so on. Just balance the tech.

Edited by Sjorpha, 22 January 2017 - 12:57 PM.

[Cold Darkness]

Sjorpha, on 22 January 2017 - 12:54 PM, said:

There is such a simple solution, just make the IS XL equally good as the Clan XL. There is no need to bend over backwards with obfuscation, ideas you know will not happen and so on. Just balance the tech.

that is an option of course, but it comes with 2 major drawbacks. first, it requires a rebalancing of the whole equipment available and second, it will either invalidate lfe before they even arrive or will require another complete rebalance of everything when they arrive.

what i find interesting is, that your attempt to "balance the tech" is equalization, the polar opposite to mysteres attempt.

Sjorpha, on 22 January 2017 - 12:54 PM, said:

Guess who wins?

at that point you are matching the higher hp instant death sidetorsos vs surviving a sidetorsoloss but less overall hp. if you ask me, that is as fair as you get without removing tech differences. of course, i wouldnt mind my mech limping like it lost a leg if i lose a sidetorso either. but that stuff goes into fine tuning balance, thats not what this thread is about.

Sjorpha, on 22 January 2017 - 12:54 PM, said:

even with SRMs good players are currently hitting and destroying the component they want with very high reliability.

hello, you might not have noticed but, thats exactly my argument. all weapons are to accurate.