77 replies to this topic

[Fox With A Shotgun]

There are plenty of recorded cases of light mechs wrecking much heavier ones. It's just that it doesn't happen very often, and usually relies on the heavier ones being complete potatoes more often than not. Skewed perceptions based on these rare one-off cases makes the entire class look better than it actually is, despite the fact that the top 5% of light mech pilots score lower in average match score than the bottom 99% of heavies and assaults.

I'll leave this one here, just to make the rabid fatmech pilots froth a little more.



Now I am become Cutefox, the destroyer of potatoes.

Edited by Fox With A Shotgun, 06 May 2017 - 05:00 PM.

[Fox the Apprentice]

Yeonne Greene, on 06 May 2017 - 02:35 PM, said:

It really, really wouldn't. You'd spend more time running around trying to cool-off than putting out damage, making you useless.

Yes, because my one LPL LCT needs all 10!

[Y E O N N E]

Fox the Apprentice, on 06 May 2017 - 06:01 PM, said:

Yes, because my one LPL LCT needs all 10!

If all you have is one LPL, why on Earth are you dropping any DHS at all?

[Khobai]

I personally think direct fire weapons should only do half damage beyond optimum range unless they have a sensor lock (with a sensor lock theyd do full damage). Then theres a reason to get sensor locks. And since lights would be the best at helping their team get sensor locks, lights would then have a purpose.

It also helps reduce the long range damage which is something the game really needs.

because right now sensors are useless. you can see farther than sensors can detect. you can shoot farther than sensors can detect. they have basically no purpose. sensors need a justification to exist. and lights need a reason to scout out enemies and detect them. the above idea fixes that.

Edited by Khobai, 07 May 2017 - 12:41 AM.

[Shifty McSwift]

Khobai, on 07 May 2017 - 12:39 AM, said:

I personally think direct fire weapons should only do half damage beyond optimum range unless they have a sensor lock (with a sensor lock theyd do full damage). Then theres a reason to get sensor locks. And since lights would be the best at helping their team get sensor locks, lights would then have a purpose.

It also helps reduce the long range damage which is something the game really needs.

because right now sensors are useless. you can see farther than sensors can detect. you can shoot farther than sensors can detect. they have basically no purpose. sensors need a justification to exist. and lights need a reason to scout out enemies and detect them. the above idea fixes that.

I am fine with different weapons having different dropoff rates in optimal damage (like srms exploding at set range, vs a ballistic travelling until it hits land but doing reduced damage along the way, but it does feel like the ranging specifics of weapons could use a pass, and in particular too many weapons work too well outside of optimal range, More weapon types could benefit from having severely reduced out of optimal range effects, not just srms.

[Khobai]

I still feel like sensors need a purpose though. so tying sensors into weapons doing damage beyond optimum range seems to kill two birds wiht one stone.

[Zigmund Freud]

Khobai, on 07 May 2017 - 12:58 AM, said:

I still feel like sensors need a purpose though. so tying sensors into weapons doing damage beyond optimum range seems to kill two birds wiht one stone.

Make lrms grate again? I know, i know, no skill, noob weapon hurr burr. Give them way more dmg, or less spread, or a bit of both. Without lights providing stable locks or narcs, it's very easy to breake line of sight and hide. And covers. And (almost never used) AMS. LRMs is one of the most underpowered weapon system in the game. Make LRMs usable, make some more rewards for scouting/locks and it will automatically make lights more useful either providing said locks, or countering enemy scouting lights.

[Requiemking]

Khobai, on 07 May 2017 - 12:58 AM, said:

I still feel like sensors need a purpose though. so tying sensors into weapons doing damage beyond optimum range seems to kill two birds wiht one stone.

Not really. A major part of why people don't play Lights is because they aren't getting paid. Your system doesn't help that(all it does is encourage the use of fast Heavies such as the Linebacker).

[Burningtoast]

I think in some game modes if a light mech does what they are suppose to do and does the scouting or captures the resource points they never get rewarded the same a the player that kills say 4 or 5 enemy mechs, Because of that players do not fully utilize their mechs for their intended role and come out of a game frustrated. I like to win as much as the next guy but I do find it a lot more satisfying to kill enemy mechs than run around capturing resource points or scouting.

This has been stated in the thread already but a reworking of the XP and C-bill reward for the players that do the little jobs would be helpful. I know the point is to get a team win but I think the scoring and rewards are too far sewed toward that and a little more emphasis on individual performance would be helpful.

[Requiemking]

Burningtoast, on 07 May 2017 - 07:14 AM, said:

I think in some game modes if a light mech does what they are suppose to do and does the scouting or captures the resource points they never get rewarded the same a the player that kills say 4 or 5 enemy mechs, Because of that players do not fully utilize their mechs for their intended role and come out of a game frustrated. I like to win as much as the next guy but I do find it a lot more satisfying to kill enemy mechs than run around capturing resource points or scouting.

This has been stated in the thread already but a reworking of the XP and C-bill reward for the players that do the little jobs would be helpful. I know the point is to get a team win but I think the scoring and rewards are too far sewed toward that and a little more emphasis on individual performance would be helpful.

Well, that would be nice, but apparently we aren't allowed to have nice things. According to a good chunk of the community(including Phil from NGNG, believe it or not) Objectives in objective-based game modes aren't anything more than a failsafe, a "secondary" win condition.

[Khobai]

Quote

Not really. A major part of why people don't play Lights is because they aren't getting paid. Your system doesn't help that(all it does is encourage the use of fast Heavies such as the Linebacker).

so give lights a spotting bonus, any damage done to targets theyre spotting, they get partial credit for

[Requiemking]

Khobai, on 08 May 2017 - 06:49 PM, said:

so give lights a spotting bonus, any damage done to targets theyre spotting, they get partial credit for

Still doesn't help much, especially when Weight restricted bonuses probably won't be a thing. and since that is the case, all it will do is give people reason to press the R key.

[Y E O N N E]

Khobai, on 08 May 2017 - 06:49 PM, said:

so give lights a spotting bonus, any damage done to targets theyre spotting, they get partial credit for

Yeah, people play a game about shooty stompy robots to not do any meaningful shooting and stomping. Seems legit.

[Khobai]

Quote

Yeah, people play a game about shooty stompy robots to not do any meaningful shooting and stomping. Seems legit.

except lights can spot and shoot at the same time? one does not exclude the other. so im not really sure what youre getting at...

theres also the fact that PGI themselves tout MWO as the thinking man's shooter which implies they want it to be more than just "shooting" and "stomping".

by tying sensors together with dealing damage beyond optimum range, it adds more tactical depth to the game beyond simply putting your cursor over an enemy and pressing fire. it also gives lights and mediums a stronger role and far more validation than they currently have (especially if you reduce the range of heavy/assault sensors). And lastly it gives the current long range meta a much needed kick in the nuts.

shooting and stomping gets old pretty fast. the game needs more tactical depth. especially since every gamemode is skirmish. although ideally we need some better and more strategic gamemodes too.

Edited by Khobai, 08 May 2017 - 08:48 PM.

[Ten Roos]

Fox With A Shotgun, on 06 May 2017 - 04:59 PM, said:

There are plenty of recorded cases of light mechs wrecking much heavier ones. It's just that it doesn't happen very often, .

I actually believe LM whether Clan or IS are OP... in the hands of a elite player. Watch vids of Lillie (or umm Lilly .. not sure of spelling) play. And its amazing how well he/she can move that thing. Its like watching death by 1000 cuts, yet Lilly never gets touched due to continual movement.

Must admit i fall into the trap when playing a LM to just keep circling.. but the best players never do. One day i hope I can move a LM like them... then I just need to learn how to aim... but that can come later

Watching an elite LMK play is like watching a work of art... I never get tired of it. Unfort I am no where near that yet

Edited by Ten Roos, 08 May 2017 - 08:48 PM.

[Requiemking]

Khobai, on 08 May 2017 - 08:37 PM, said:

except lights can spot and shoot at the same time? one does not exclude the other. so im not really sure what youre getting at...

theres also the fact that PGI themselves tout MWO as the thinking man's shooter which implies they want it to be more than just "shooting" and "stomping".

by tying sensors together with dealing damage beyond optimum range, it adds more tactical depth to the game beyond simply putting your cursor over an enemy and pressing fire. it also gives lights and mediums a stronger role and far more validation than they currently have (especially if you reduce the range of heavy/assault sensors). And lastly it gives the current long range meta a much needed kick in the nuts.

shooting and stomping gets old pretty fast. the game needs more tactical depth. especially since every gamemode is skirmish. although ideally we need some better and more strategic gamemodes too.

The current game modes could be more strategic, if the game punished your score for trying to play it as Skirmish. As in, yeah, you can go all aggro on hunting the enemy down, but your matchscore will tank because you didn't help play the mode.

[Shifty McSwift]

Requiemking, on 08 May 2017 - 10:34 PM, said:

The current game modes could be more strategic, if the game punished your score for trying to play it as Skirmish. As in, yeah, you can go all aggro on hunting the enemy down, but your matchscore will tank because you didn't help play the mode.

Overkill, doing well in a game could result in losing lots of hard earned score to a random mistake, which would ignore all that hard work done.

Just opening up the match rewards system more like they have been doing is the best path, just keep adding variables to match score and lessening the overwhelming and highly self paying effects like weapon damage and kills.

Protecting friends with AMS, staying in lance formations, flanking, scouting and spotting bonuses all help toward the end goal of focusing on doing good teamwork in QP games, they just need to keep at it.

[Requiemking]

Shifty McSwift, on 08 May 2017 - 10:47 PM, said:

Overkill, doing well in a game could result in losing lots of hard earned score to a random mistake, which would ignore all that hard work done.

Just opening up the match rewards system more like they have been doing is the best path, just keep adding variables to match score and lessening the overwhelming and highly self paying effects like weapon damage and kills.

Protecting friends with AMS, staying in lance formations, flanking, scouting and spotting bonuses all help toward the end goal of focusing on doing good teamwork in QP games, they just need to keep at it.

The whole point of my version of Score 2.0 is to discourage playing every mode as Skirmish by attacking where it hurts, aka your stats. It helps Light mechs by letting them be fairly rewarded for doing things other than combat, and it deals with the problem of playing every mode as Skirmish by tanking the "L33T Skillz" crowd's stats(they are the ones who started the "every mode as Skirmish" non-sense. They also the biggest culprit when it comes to harassing people who try to play Objectives).

Edited by Requiemking, 08 May 2017 - 10:57 PM.

[Zigmund Freud]

Requiemking, on 08 May 2017 - 10:57 PM, said:

The whole point of my version of Score 2.0 is to discourage playing every mode as Skirmish by attacking where it hurts, aka your stats. It helps Light mechs by letting them be fairly rewarded for doing things other than combat, and it deals with the problem of playing every mode as Skirmish by tanking the "L33T Skillz" crowd's stats(they are the ones who started the "every mode as Skirmish" non-sense. They also the biggest culprit when it comes to harassing people who try to play Objectives).

It will only make loud skirmish fans butthurt even more. I say existing game modes are fine. The problem of playing them as skirmish is only that some people want to play only skirmish.
Bring back game mode checkboxes, and you will see how dramatically conquest, incursion and assault experience changes. And everybody is happy playing what they want. We got to scout, trash bases, and fight other lights for resource points, while skirmish guys play skirmish 24/7. The only "con" is a bit longer matchmaking time, but i'm sure it's fine. Remember to make 1-2 minute brake every 20 minutes to rest your eyes, while game is searching for a match.

[Jingseng]

as long as players keep saying with conviction (however reluctantly, sincerely or not, expressed) that the game is only about blowing up robots, it will remain so.

Here is a player who has raised his voice calling for change.

And yet many continue to say "but it is not currently so" instead of adding their voice to the call.