47 replies to this topic

[razenWing]

I saw an interesting discussion on Reddit about boating weapons...

An interesting concept comes up regarding how a diverse weapon set promote diversity, and thus... "Funner" gameplay.

I don't disagree with that analysis, but I feel the discussion is made tangent and deviates from the main problem. Let's establish one fact straight up, players adapt to whatever they can get most advantage of from the gameplay given. This concept applies not just to MWO, but RPG... Hell, even minesweeper have a best chance to win strategy.

If your game is designed around a single spawn killing the other team as quickly as possible, then yes of course it makes sense to boat weapon because a simplified harmonized weapon set is great again one main target. Just like, if two tanks were going to fight one another, would you rather have 2 main cannons or 1 cannon + machine guns?

What I am trying to say is...

The problem is game design. It had been and probably will continue to be a problem for times to come.

Without going deep philosophical, what's the purpose of lore builds? Have you ever thought why it was necessary to have 1 missile, 2 machines guns and 1 laser? It's because Mechs, in principle, is supposed to deal with a variety of threats. If you have 20 foot soldiers entrenched in a building lobbing anti tank missiles at you, you don't deal with it by firing laser through 1 window at a time.

You fire a big *** missiles to bring that entire building down!

Now, unfortunately, being that this is a Mech v Mech game with no other threats, you only have to focus on singular threat. The equation becomes how and where to fight, and optimize it.

But I do not for a second believe that nothing can be done.

Again, take RPG game like Diablo for example, why use multi shot if you know that you are always fighting other players? Spam your skill in guided arrow and kill them sobs!

Buy how RPG compensate is not by reducing the effectiveness of offensive spells whenever one becomes perceived imbalance. It's by introducing synergized spells, buffs and debuffs.

Same concept can absolutely apply. Same your missiles fire special coating that increase laser damage for 2 seconds after impact... Would you ignore the m slot to maximize energy use? Probably not, right?

From another angle, say a way more complex defensive system is in play, all I use is reactive armor, then it didn't make sense for you to invest purely in srms right? Unless you want to half your damage all the time.

The fact is, lazy game design is the reason why boating and meta exists. Not the other way around. I think PGI in he latest patch realized how silly it was to conform so closely to lore, because the basic game design does not simulate an accurate representation of lore situation anyways. So the way around it is really to think outside the box and focus on making a fun game first and foremost, than to make a fanboy jerk off program.

As for people that will undoubtedly say... "But it..."

Let me counter with this... Do you want a fun game with a HUGE population or a small niche game where you circle jerk one another with your online buddies?

In that sense, Mech assault actually does this better than Mech warrior 4. (Blasphemy, I know). But at its core, mechwkarrior 4 still focus only on fighting other Mechs. If you are not running the dual Gauss 3 ppc direwolf, you done f up and go back and replay the game. At least Mech Mech assault make you choose different weapons because of different situations.

[Scyther]

It's a good notion, "but".

But you do have to keep in mind that it's a licensed IP based on an established framework. Maybe they have the freedom to add special laser-focusing-mist missiles that never existed in the IP, maybe they don't. Licensing an IP and then saying "but we want to add and change stuff without regard to the IP" seems odd and legally questionable to me.

Small changes like that won't change the game population to 'a HUGE one'. For better or worse, PGI took the entire BattleTech lore base and galactic setting and chopped it down to deathmatch-on-a-few-maps. That's your niche market right there, and then they chopped it further by making it a PPFLD-boat-to-win shooter (your original point).

BT mechs didn't only have diverse layouts because of multiple threat types. It was because the maps were completely variable, engagement happened under many range and visibility conditions, and the lore itself was built around a 'work with the non-optimal tech we have available rather than the tech we wish we had' approach.

You also have to deal with certain design issues in a mech shooter. Movement is fast, maps fairly small - you don't need a mix of weapons to fight at any range because you can quickly move into your optimal range. In a tabletop game, you have plenty of time to specify what each weapon system is doing each round. In a fast shooter, not everyone is using a 5-button mouse to control their mixed weapon systems. Some competitive types will go out, buy a better mouse, a bigger screen, a faster computer, load in a weapons-fire-macro manager, all for a bit more edge. Others will do it by being extremely skilled. That 'HUGE' audience however, is just looking for the easiest way to have some fun while poking around in battle for an hour or two, with the same gear they normally use for Facebook and email.

If I wanted to limit boating, I would implement something like an 'Optimal' and 'Max' weapons limit on mechs. Somewhat like ghost heat, say your mech has 6 energy slots 'optimal' but 9 or 12 max. Each INSTALLED (not fired) weapon beyond optimal adds 5% heat to every weapon fired of that type. Install 7, they each fire with +5% heat. Install 8, they each fire with+10% heat. With machine guns I would likely make the Optimal run without jamming, then each one above Optimal adds to jamming chance for each MG.

I'm not sure how often 'missile boating' is an issue, but with missiles I would probably make beyond-optimal into a Cooldown increase.

The numbers should be balanced in such a way that you can still use the mech at above-Optimal and even Max limits, but you have to make some tough choices about HS, skill tree cooling, other weapons fitted, etc.

Edited by MadBadger, 13 May 2018 - 05:14 AM.

[El Bandito]

razenWing, on 13 May 2018 - 04:26 AM, said:

Without going deep philosophical, what's the purpose of lore builds? Have you ever thought why it was necessary to have 1 missile, 2 machines guns and 1 laser?

Except even table top BT had gradually switched over to boats, cause boated weapons are simply far more effective, even in tabletop format.

Only way PGI can dissuade people from boating to cheese level is to give negative quirks whenever you mount more than certain amount of the same type of weapons, GH or not. Maybe make exceptions for certain canon boat mechs, such as PPCs for the Awesome, in order to sprinkle in some flavors.

Edited by El Bandito, 13 May 2018 - 05:32 AM.

[Variant1]

the real issue is the quirck skill tree, the weapon nodes need to be removed they decrease ttk and make boating way too easy not to mention the heat gen nodes go against mechwarriors heat penalty system

[El Bandito]

Variant1, on 13 May 2018 - 05:33 AM, said:

the real issue is the quirck skill tree, the weapon nodes need to be removed they decrease ttk and make boating way too easy not to mention the heat gen nodes go against mechwarriors heat penalty system

PGI aint gonna take away the skill tree. Just no way.

[Dark Wooki33 IIC]

I

razenWing, on 13 May 2018 - 04:26 AM, said:

Just like, if two tanks were going to fight one another, would you rather have 2 main cannons or 1 cannon + machine guns?

What I am trying to say is...

The problem is game design. It had been and probably will continue to be a problem for times to come.

Depends on the tank,if it is a mammoth tank i would prefer 2 guns.

But you arent wrong.
Boating is the way to go. Oyu wouldnt want to mix spearthrowers, bowman, crossbowman and slingers in a unit and you wouldnt mix alot of different caliber guns on a battleship.

The basic concept of mixed builds for all ranges is silly in itself ... btech.

[Imperius]

ECM
Ghost Heat
Dartboard of Balance
Groups reduced to 4 man only
3rd Person View
Skill Tree
Engine Desync
Sticking to lore over providing a balanced and fun game.
Balancing at the low end of the spectrum but not addressing the new user experience.
Sticking with a hard to work with Frankenstein coded engine.

Just the list of things that have made my friends and I quit playing.

[Dragonporn]

This is a real design and gameplay problem for the game. It's definitely not the biggest problem, but having more varied loadouts more effective than boating same weapons may increase complexity and fun factor (for some people), eventually turning this game into less Alpha YOLO and more into actual BT combat experience. Another problem is that boating not only allows literally one button builds, but also have negative effect on TTK, which gets ridiculous. As an example, I have a Nova with 6x HMLs and 4 LMGs. With Alpha I manage to literally one shot CT turning it red and finishing it off with LMG fire almost immediately to some mechs, and that's only my Medium, with Assault I can boat ALOT heavier and deadlier alphas, which is bad.

As El Bandito mentioned, in MWO in particular there are very easy ways to solve it with specific quirks and more penalties like GH and etc. It will definitely solve supershort TTK issue PGI currently aims for, and make gameplay (subjectively) better.

[Alexander of Macedon]

The real problem is that some people can aim well while others can't. As long as there are weapons which reward good aim, there will be people with bad aim crying about them.

[VaudeVillain]

PGI took some of the counterbalances out that were in Battletech or disregarded it, which would have encouraged people to bring multiple weapons.

For lasers, it's counterbalance was heat, thus encouraging ballistics (or missiles). With no proper heat scale, lasers don't have much restrictions other than ghost heat.

For ballistics, it was limited ammo amounts per ton, thus encouraging lasers (or missiles). Missiles generally had more ammo per ton, thus were an option.

For missiles, it was limited ammo and spread, thus encouraging ballistics for pinpoint and lasers for non ammo based. This also made LRM boats less likely since you didn't have as much ammo. Also, Battletech had shorter LRM ranges so you could close quicker, thus encouraging you to carry different weapons for when that happened.

Edited by VaudeVillain, 13 May 2018 - 06:06 AM.

[Variant1]

El Bandito, on 13 May 2018 - 05:37 AM, said:

PGI aint gonna take away the skill tree. Just no way.

Im not talking about removing the quirk tree. Just removing weapon nodes specifically, they are too good and makes it worse than old skill tree. Maybe they could add in some nodes for equipment like tag, artemis etc focus on those kind of things instead of going for linear weapon upgrades

[Pain G0D]

I think we would see less boating if MWO gave awesome ingame rewards for playing with stock builds . That would shake things up .

Imagine being paid 1-12 MC depending on your match score for playing with original builds .

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Quote

In that sense, Mech assault actually does this better than Mech warrior 4. (Blasphemy, I know). But at its core, mechwkarrior 4 still focus only on fighting other Mechs. If you are not running the dual Gauss 3 ppc direwolf, you done f up and go back and replay the game. At least Mech Mech assault make you choose different weapons because of different situations.

thats only in the QP Popular servers with noammo/heat and other nonsense ...than you not played Missions in the Leagues ?

[Variant1]

Pain G0D, on 13 May 2018 - 06:19 AM, said:

I think we would see less boating if MWO gave awesome ingame rewards for playing with stock builds . That would shake things up .

Imagine being paid 1-12 MC depending on your match score for playing with original builds .

nein the awsome needs ghost heat for firing more than 1 ppc.
Also the stock builds for mechs are meant for table top, their effectivness is going to be different in mwo since its mech sim as oposed to a turn base strategy that TT is

[Asym]

El Bandito, on 13 May 2018 - 05:27 AM, said:

Except even table top BT had gradually switched over to boats, cause boated weapons are simply far more effective, even in tabletop format.

Only way PGI can dissuade people from boating to cheese level is to give negative quirks whenever you mount more than certain amount of the same type of weapons, GH or not. Maybe make exceptions for certain canon boat mechs, such as PPCs for the Awesome, in order to sprinkle in some flavors.

Power shifts from "Stock", as you have correctly stated, must be resolved by significant negative quirks. Omni switches should have a performance/effectiveness cost great enough to preclude the benefits.

As you have said: if the stock mech has 4 ERPPC's "as issued", that is and should remain cannon. In fact, they'd be locked-in and you'd be forced to "buy another mech" if the mission precluded 4 ERPPC's....

Could this happen? Not in our life time but, it is a neat discussion.....

Edited by Asym, 13 May 2018 - 07:09 AM.

[El Bandito]

Variant1, on 13 May 2018 - 06:12 AM, said:

Im not talking about removing the quirk tree. Just removing weapon nodes specifically, they are too good and makes it worse than old skill tree. Maybe they could add in some nodes for equipment like tag, artemis etc focus on those kind of things instead of going for linear weapon upgrades

That's completely fine.

[DaZur]

There should be linear penalty when a mech is modified beyond its original intent...

Yes, boating is a thing and there are mechs that are designed to boat. But when a mech that was designed around a balanced or mixed loadout is Frankensteined into a boating there should be penalty for doing so...

I mean you can shoehorn a 8 cylinder small block into a Yugo but these diminishing returns...

Edited by DaZur, 13 May 2018 - 09:02 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

I don't think boating sucks...

Imperius, on 13 May 2018 - 05:58 AM, said:

Groups reduced to 4 man only

That got rolled back as soon as it was tried...

[Koniving]

razenWing, on 13 May 2018 - 04:26 AM, said:

Same concept can absolutely apply. Same your missiles fire special coating that increase laser damage for 2 seconds after impact... Would you ignore the m slot to maximize energy use? Probably not, right?

From another angle, say a way more complex defensive system is in play, all I use is reactive armor, then it didn't make sense for you to invest purely in srms right? Unless you want to half your damage all the time.

The fact is, lazy game design is the reason why boating and meta exists. Not the other way around. I think PGI in he latest patch realized how silly it was to conform so closely to lore, because the basic game design does not simulate an accurate representation of lore situation anyways. So the way around it is really to think outside the box and focus on making a fun game first and foremost, than to make a fanboy jerk off program.

If I may, there's a great point to be had here in the entire post.

On this specific note, though, there IS something that can be done, and its STRAIGHT from the 1980s lore.

Very early on, in some of the first novels and source books, there's mention of "Anti-Laser Aerosols" as one of the reasons that lasers have such limited ranges.

It actually goes into detail in BattleTechnology, which was canon for over 20 years and was made non-canon because there's a Harmony Gold mech on every third page, on the same year of the last time Harmony Gold decided they wanted more money. So we can safely assume that since about 80% of the **** it says is in the TechManual made in 2007...and THAT is still canon despite being made 1 year before they made BattleTechnology non-canon...

Now, this said...
Lasers are impeded by "Dust, smoke, sandstorms" and "Anti-Laser Aerosols" which by their description is a "weightless" (in terms of tabletop rules) consumable counter measure used by Battlemechs in self-defense. This apparently occurs on some of the "nearly impossible misses that just miss"... which are supposed to be interpreted as "Ha ha I anti-laser aerosoled the air to reduce your laser's effectiveness!"

So. We could try some of the following things: Number 2 at the very least, 2 + 1 + 1.5 would be ideal, 2+1 could still be good.

1) Introduce weather effects, localized or otherwise, which could impede laser effectiveness (range, damage). Potentially that could cause other side effects like increased heat gen. Just depends on how crazy we want to get.

1.5) Since atmospheric issues decrease laser effectiveness, then in Space where its difficult to pump heat out of the mech, but no atmosphere to deal with... lasers could experience a boost of damage and range to offset how hot the map SHOULD be for them.

2) Introduce the Anti-Laser Aerosol Consumable. Something with say 2 to 3 uses, which when put to use, any lasers passing through it would be reduced in damage and effective range. This could be similar to a smoke screen. Since Cry Engine doesn't like particles, they could be 3D meshes playing an animated effect similar to all that crap that Square does in FF magic. This would also give it a physical entity for the server to track for hit detection.

This doesn't require ghost heat, doesn't directly affect boating and the core issues that PGI doesn't want to change... but it does improve upon the "Game design" and uses a lore friendly mechanic to help mitigate an ongoing problem.

Edited by Koniving, 13 May 2018 - 09:29 AM.

[FupDup]

razenWing, on 13 May 2018 - 04:26 AM, said:

In that sense, Mech assault actually does this better than Mech warrior 4. (Blasphemy, I know). But at its core, mechwkarrior 4 still focus only on fighting other Mechs. If you are not running the dual Gauss 3 ppc direwolf, you done f up and go back and replay the game. At least Mech Mech assault make you choose different weapons because of different situations.

Mechassault didn't actually have any customization other than changing your mech/pilot color.

If you're talking about replaying the singleplayer mode then for MA1 it was generally about picking the biggest and meanest mech you had unlocked at that point and for MA2 you generally didn't get much choice unless you found some unmanned vehicles or mechs to hop into (or if you had a BA available you could highjack a mech).

MA was fun for what it was but it's not really comparable to a PC MW game with loadout customization.