108 replies to this topic

[BTGbullseye]

sycocys, on 25 May 2018 - 05:34 AM, said:

Because whether you are a new player or player that bought a new mech you are immediately at a power level disadvantage because you don't have access to the skill nodes and you are in the same match pools as people that have them maxed out.

"end of their 25-match bonus period" - this is the major problem with the current and prior skill buff system. It's just as much a problem and probably more-so for post cadet until you get to the point you have gxp and c-bills coming out of your ears.

For all the players that don't have a massive excess of convertible xp and c-bills - you have 25 (cadet) (up to ~50ish, maybe less/more depending on the mech and your rng with the MM) matches where you are at a substantial disadvantage before you even hit launch.

Requiring loadout costs for "specialization" would mitigate the majority of the imbalance that the buff tree injects into the game.

Are you really saying that you want to remove all forms of progression in the game?

[Xmith]

Jman5, on 24 May 2018 - 07:34 PM, said:

I can't say I agree with OP's reasoning, but 100% radar deprivation became absolutely imbalanced after the skill tree was introduced.

It used to be that the benefits of Radar Deprivation module and the benefits of Target Decay module would essentially cancel each other out leaving you with a couple seconds of lock. This was a good way to balance the two modifiers. Then skill tree came along and made 100% radar deprivation completely hard counter 100% target decay and the base target retention time.

Sure some people will point out that it takes a couple extra points to max out radar deprivation but that's hardly enough to make up for the fact that radar deprivation completely nullifies your target lock time no matter how many points you put into target decay skills.

I think the only saving grace is that 99% of people think they're Neo from The Matrix and don't put any points in Radar Deprivation. It would be a nightmare for game balance if everyone maxed it.

They need to go back to the old way it was balanced where radar deprivation would completely nullify lock on time, unless the player had target decay. Then they would get at least a couple seconds before its lost.

I only have 40% Radar Dep. It is just enuff to dodge some of the missiles, never all. I cannot afford to go full Radar Dep. Too costly. Besides cover is the best protection. I use lots and lots of cover whenever possible.

[dario03]

BTGbullseye, on 25 May 2018 - 11:36 AM, said:

Are you really saying that you want to remove all forms of progression in the game?

I would sort of. Have new mechs come with bonuses on everything or pick some when you get the mech. Then after playing and earning xp you can go through and customize the bonuses to more min/max of what you want. Basically allow customization but don't make a leveled mech straight up more powerful, just more customized.

[Cloves]

sycocys, on 24 May 2018 - 05:43 PM, said:

Another thing that wouldn't be an issue if the node system required crit slots and tonnage.

. Fine. Then I will run more guns and more heat sinks and bigger engines and start with a better mech than your mastered mech. Kill advancement completely, make all mechs meta and same, reduce exp to worthlessness.

[Cloves]

dario03, on 25 May 2018 - 12:13 PM, said:

I would sort of. Have new mechs come with bonuses on everything or pick some when you get the mech. Then after playing and earning xp you can go through and customize the bonuses to more min/max of what you want. Basically allow customization but don't make a leveled mech straight up more powerful, just more customized.

Customized? Like cosmetic?

Or do you mean like a choice between slightly more armor or slightly more agile or slightly more
Shooty? If you allow the customization to have any real in game effect, it’s going to make a mech more powerful. Or it’s cosmetic... you want a decal and cammo skill tree?

[Latorque]

Whtever strenghtens LRMs in their function is to be automatically denied. Subjectively, radar derp could be strenghtened even more and i wouldn't shed a tear. Whatever reduced indirect fire and static gameplay is fine by me - pretty much any match on polar highlands is a good example of how a game shouldn't pan out. Whichever side brings more lurmboats wins, spiced up with a littele gauss snipering on top.

On any other map, the current balance seems to work pretty well atm, so please don't touch.

[Naduk]

it seems pretty damn clear that many people in here dont remember how powerful radar derp was as a module
it was free, instantaneous lock removal guaranteed by even the smallest visual blocker.. like a lamp post
it was ALWAYS instantaneous, it stacked with ECM and ignored all lock duration buffs including tonnage items like BAP
it was so powerful that when combined with ECM, it was better than the current stealth armour and it needed no weight
it was an era of zero lockon weapons being used, it countered everything, even tag and narc

the current skill tree version is fantastic
it slowly builds up a lockon reduction
it takes several nodes deep in a less used tree, this takes nodes away from other uses
it can be countered by Target Decay and BAP/CAP/Artemis/tag/narc/alliesdata
it no longer stacks with ECM's lock delay because it no longer auto cancels partial locks

so here's the thing
if your having issues with radar dep
its more likely your build or play style that is the issue
make sure you have as many counters equipped as possible
make sure you have backup weapons
(a hand full of small lasers does wonders at stopping peekaboo, if an enemy thinks its not working they will change it up)
change your attack angle
move in closer, even with LRM, min range is 180, make it hard for them to use cover and radar derp is useless, pursue to 300m, engage with all weapons
field narc and remove all enemy options for hiding

never ever run only streaks
NEVER EVER RUN ONLY STREAKS !

if you are massing streaks
you require
Artemis (its for the computer, not the missiles)
BAP/CAP
TAG
secondary weapons in case of multiple ecm enemies
UAV

[dario03]

Cloves, on 25 May 2018 - 01:49 PM, said:

Customized? Like cosmetic?

Or do you mean like a choice between slightly more armor or slightly more agile or slightly more
Shooty? If you allow the customization to have any real in game effect, it’s going to make a mech more powerful. Or it’s cosmetic... you want a decal and cammo skill tree?

I'm saying you would start off with a preset skill tree or some other system that lets you have a maxed out mech as soon as you get it. However in order to change it afterwards you would need to earn xp. So basically leveling up lets you customize the mech to be min/maxed but not make it flat out better at everything than a unleveled mech.

[Cloves]

dario03, on 25 May 2018 - 04:38 PM, said:

I'm saying you would start off with a preset skill tree or some other system that lets you have a maxed out mech as soon as you get it. However in order to change it afterwards you would need to earn xp. So basically leveling up lets you customize the mech to be min/maxed but not make it flat out better at everything than a unleveled mech.

You don't get enough points to be flat out better at everything than an unleveled mech, that's pretty much the old system. Now you can get maybe a 10% advantage in something over an unskilled mech, in maybe three areas if you ignore all the specialty builds like the sensor tree. What games are you playing that give you a maxed out character to start, but then charge you to modify them? All that comes to mind is something like team fortress, or maybe LOL? The current system is a faucet and drain economy with a cash tap built in. They expect you to spend as much currency (time or cash) mastering the mech as you do for buying it. As it stands, you could use cash to do what you want, buy the mech for MC, then Master it with GXP from XP transfer from other mechs. In order for the servers to be active with folks for you to play against, there needs to be a reward over time component to keep folks coming back, otherwise, they play the game once, maybe once with each mech on each map, to "plat" all the achivos they might get, then log to the next game.

[dario03]

Cloves, on 25 May 2018 - 05:22 PM, said:

You don't get enough points to be flat out better at everything than an unleveled mech, that's pretty much the old system. Now you can get maybe a 10% advantage in something over an unskilled mech, in maybe three areas if you ignore all the specialty builds like the sensor tree. What games are you playing that give you a maxed out character to start, but then charge you to modify them? All that comes to mind is something like team fortress, or maybe LOL? The current system is a faucet and drain economy with a cash tap built in. They expect you to spend as much currency (time or cash) mastering the mech as you do for buying it. As it stands, you could use cash to do what you want, buy the mech for MC, then Master it with GXP from XP transfer from other mechs. In order for the servers to be active with folks for you to play against, there needs to be a reward over time component to keep folks coming back, otherwise, they play the game once, maybe once with each mech on each map, to "plat" all the achivos they might get, then log to the next game.

A leveled mech is flat out better than a non-leveled mech though. You don't lose anything when you level up. The change I'm suggesting could still have a reason to grind if it was just a generic bonus across the board since if you want to min/max you would still need to get xp.

[sycocys]

BTGbullseye, on 25 May 2018 - 11:36 AM, said:

Are you really saying that you want to remove all forms of progression in the game?

No.

I'm saying that the specialization/skill node tree needs to have a loadout cost so it isn't driving into game imbalance. Having something like the node tree is perfectly fine, but if it's going to be there it needs to have an offsetting cost to keep the PvP MM balanced across the board as players are near all dumped into the same bucket.

-This has been the biggest problem with the skill system since closed beta. Most people, especially f2p folks, just got hung up and couldn't see beyond the 3 mech requirement which was also not a super idea but didn't create a game imbalance.

[Unit 86]

5 pages of people follow for low quality bait
lol

[Dimento Graven]

FupDup, on 24 May 2018 - 03:15 PM, said:

Radar Derp is primarily used to make lock-ons go away faster after you leave the line of sight of a missile mech. If a mech is humping your leg then Radar Derp won't have much effect since they're not behind a piece of cover.

...

Correction: Radar derp will have an effect as soon as the 'mech gets behind, out of forward view of the enemy, effectively your own 'mech becomes its cover.

I just think a proper counter to the majority of light pilots would be to bring back knock down, and add physical attacks. The majority of crappy light pilots would no longer be able to leg hump without risk, and the good light pilots won't notice anything anyway as they don't require mashing themselves into their target to be able to destroy them.

[Khobai]

knockdowns should be readded. but there needs to be some kindve stability gauge like in battletech. where you can only be knocked down if your mech is already unstable. so like overheating, jumpjetting, running full speed, taking hits from heavy weapons like AC20s would all reduce stability. and you could only be knocked down if your stablity is already low.

otherwise knockdowns will get abused just like before, with people deliberately bowling into mechs to knock them over.

Edited by Khobai, 26 May 2018 - 09:22 AM.

[dario03]

Dimento Graven, on 26 May 2018 - 09:10 AM, said:

Correction: Radar derp will have an effect as soon as the 'mech gets behind, out of forward view of the enemy, effectively your own 'mech becomes its cover.

I just think a proper counter to the majority of light pilots would be to bring back knock down, and add physical attacks. The majority of crappy light pilots would no longer be able to leg hump without risk, and the good light pilots won't notice anything anyway as they don't require mashing themselves into their target to be able to destroy them.

All lights would notice knockdown once their own team mates knock them down repeatedly.

And if they ever did re add it they would need to give lights some major bonuses to offset it since lights don't need any more nerfs. Or they would at least need to make it so that the knockdowns isn't just a bigger is better thing. Perhaps lights are easier to knockdown but bigger mechs stay down longer and can also be knockdown by a light. Or if a mech isn't knocked down then it goes into a regain balance mode (think Atlas comically spinning its arms around going woaaahhhhhh). Make it a risky tactic for anybody to do.

[Cloves]

dario03, on 26 May 2018 - 10:25 AM, said:

All lights would notice knockdown once their own team mates knock them down repeatedly.

And if they ever did re add it they would need to give lights some major bonuses to offset it since lights don't need any more nerfs. Or they would at least need to make it so that the knockdowns isn't just a bigger is better thing. Perhaps lights are easier to knockdown but bigger mechs stay down longer and can also be knockdown by a light. Or if a mech isn't knocked down then it goes into a regain balance mode (think Atlas comically spinning its arms around going woaaahhhhhh). Make it a risky tactic for anybody to do.

Or just give lights a damage multiplier that increases until the weight classes all settle at 25%

[SmokedJag]

Putting it deep in the Sensor tree was a large nerf. You have to sacrifice a lot to get instant radar derp, it *should* be powerful if you do that.

[Dimento Graven]

dario03, on 26 May 2018 - 10:25 AM, said:

All lights would notice knockdown once their own team mates knock them down repeatedly.

Re-read my comment about the actual 'skilled light pilots' not noticing this.

Quote

And if they ever did re add it they would need to give lights some major bonuses to offset it since lights don't need any more nerfs.

Adding it wouldn't be a nerf, it would be a 'new' feature, something long been missing in this game.

It makes ZERO f'ing sense that a light 'mech should be allowed to continuously jam itself into a larger 'mech with little risk.

Quote

Or they would at least need to make it so that the knockdowns isn't just a bigger is better thing.

Yeah, but when it comes to knock downs, yes, bigger is better, unless you got a lot of speed, then speed makes a difference too.

Quote

Perhaps lights are easier to knockdown but bigger mechs stay down longer and can also be knockdown by a light. Or if a mech isn't knocked down then it goes into a regain balance mode (think Atlas comically spinning its arms around going woaaahhhhhh). Make it a risky tactic for anybody to do.

Agreed, damage to BOTH parties should occur, and BOTH parties should take risk (as it was in table top as I recall).

Cloves, on 26 May 2018 - 11:02 AM, said:

Or just give lights a damage multiplier that increases until the weight classes all settle at 25%

Um no. THAT is... idiotic at best.

It's not like we don't have lights with gobs of MG's and lasers not already capable of quickly coring out 'mech rears and legs.

Do you really want bonuses to turn "quickly" into "near instantly"? Well if all you pilot are lights, SURE YOU DO, but then again, that's not reasonable is it?

SmokedJag, on 26 May 2018 - 03:01 PM, said:

Putting it deep in the Sensor tree was a large nerf. You have to sacrifice a lot to get instant radar derp, it *should* be powerful if you do that.

Yes, considering how consarnedly deep it is, it better be DAMNED good, in fact, it's expensive enough that anyone who targets you with lasers should have a hand come out of their monitors and cover their eyes... (DISCLAIMER: ridiculous statement made to demonstrate the ridiculousness of the depth of radar deprivation).

[Khobai]

Quote

Yeah, but when it comes to knock downs, yes, bigger is better, unless you got a lot of speed, then speed makes a difference too.

bigger is not always better. if youre top heavy like a fafnir with a high center of mass that would work against you for purposes of knockdown. a top heavy fafnir would be far less stable than a lighter assault that isnt top heavy. the location of the center of mass probably matters more than the tonnage.

mechs that are top heavy should have lower base stability than mechs with uniform weight distribution.

I do think they should readd knockdowns. But I think we need a stablity meter and working gyroscopes that help lower the instability over time. And a mech's base stability should be determined by a variety of different factors.

if you manage your stability properly you should be able to avoid getting knocked down most of the time.

Edited by Khobai, 26 May 2018 - 05:02 PM.

[dario03]

Dimento Graven, on 26 May 2018 - 04:49 PM, said:

Re-read my comment about the actual 'skilled light pilots' not noticing this.

I saw it. It would still have an affect on all lights. It won't affect all the same but it will have an affect.

Quote

Adding it wouldn't be a nerf, it would be a 'new' feature, something long been missing in this game.

It makes ZERO f'ing sense that a light 'mech should be allowed to continuously jam itself into a larger 'mech with little risk.

It would be a nerf to lights if it was put back in without changes. Similar to how putting in the 40kph legged speed limit and target spotted hurt lights more than other mechs even though it applies to all mechs (or well most mechs for the 40kph part).

Quote

Yeah, but when it comes to knock downs, yes, bigger is better, unless you got a lot of speed, then speed makes a difference too.

Whatever works to balance it is fine. If at slow speeds the big mechs have an advantage then thats fine, as long as at higher speeds the lighter mech also causes the bigger mech to fall and the bigger mech takes longer to get up. Or like I said before maybe the bigger mech loses balance for a bit.

Quote

Agreed, damage to BOTH parties should occur, and BOTH parties should take risk (as it was in table top as I recall).

Which is why the system would need a decent amount of changes or smaller mechs would need buffs if knockdown was put back in. The old system favored bigger mechs to much (except for Dragons running everything including assaults over for a bit).

However I think the biggest issue is technical. I'm not convinced that it could be done well in this game. Perhaps in MWO2 if that ever happens.

Edited by dario03, 26 May 2018 - 05:29 PM.