35 replies to this topic

[ShiverMeRivets]

Well, this player has never played TT or read any of the books, so 0 F###s are given regarding the lore. I like the slow and powerful feel of mech combat. This is also why I think that tiny mechs running at 160 speed and challange the network update rate, are not a good thing in general. Also, the amount of spike output damage and damage in general makes this game play more like regular shooters, i.e, hide and peak because you cannot sustain hits. This is also in contrast to the idea of heavily armored giant machines.

MWO2 should dial the speed and TTK back quite a bit.

[Karl Streiger]

ShiverMeRivets, on 14 June 2018 - 05:04 AM, said:

MWO2 should dial the speed and TTK back quite a bit.

Wich should have been happened already (don't know why PGI is centered around their 5second bursts damage overkill)

When you look at the stats - the first SHS had a dissipation of 0.1/s and added a threshold of 1 to the heat bar of 30.
So heat dissipation is centered around 10second rounds, but weapons were used without time difference. A AC2 doesn`t deal 0.2dmg per second... it dealt 2 sometimes even more damage per second


This is what MW4 did - they used the time reference as base and modified some values for the need of balance.
I don't have the exact stats but the (IS) PPC did fire faster compared to the (CL) ERPPC. 5 and 6 seconds - I think.
Medium Lasers did recharge very fast but dealt only little damage - and so on.
Another TT approach for cannons was MW2 - the ACs no matter the caliber did fire almost with the same RoF. This made AC20 builds very scary because you could deplete your ammunition in seconds.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 14 June 2018 - 05:20 AM.

[MTier Slayed Up]

ShiverMeRivets, on 14 June 2018 - 05:04 AM, said:

Well, this player has never played TT or read any of the books, so 0 F###s are given regarding the lore. I like the slow and powerful feel of mech combat. This is also why I think that tiny mechs running at 160 speed and challange the network update rate, are not a good thing in general. Also, the amount of spike output damage and damage in general makes this game play more like regular shooters, i.e, hide and peak because you cannot sustain hits. This is also in contrast to the idea of heavily armored giant machines.

MWO2 should dial the speed and TTK back quite a bit.

Somewhat of a solution would be an implementation of melee so lights can't face hug assaults to death. The other solution is changing out the CryEngine to Unreal for a smoother experience. No idea why the CryEngine was the go-to system, but I've hated it since it's introduction from Crysis.

[Prototelis]

Karl Streiger, on 14 June 2018 - 05:16 AM, said:

Wich should have been happened already (don't know why PGI is centered around their 5second bursts damage overkill)

When you look at the stats - the first SHS had a dissipation of 0.1/s and added a threshold of 1 to the heat bar of 30.
So heat dissipation is centered around 10second rounds, but weapons were used without time difference. A AC2 doesn`t deal 0.2dmg per second... it dealt 2 sometimes even more damage per second


This is what MW4 did - they used the time reference as base and modified some values for the need of balance.
I don't have the exact stats but the (IS) PPC did fire faster compared to the (CL) ERPPC. 5 and 6 seconds - I think.
Medium Lasers did recharge very fast but dealt only little damage - and so on.
Another TT approach for cannons was MW2 - the ACs no matter the caliber did fire almost with the same RoF. This made AC20 builds very scary because you could deplete your ammunition in seconds.

Slowing the game down is not going to suddenly make it lest twitch based.

The first person to react is still going to be the person most likely to win an engagement.


Mw4 is a terrible example of how to balance a mechwarrior title. All of the lasers were hitscan instant damage. Large laser boats ruled that game, ttk was much shorter in mw4. You must not remember.

Edited by Prototelis, 14 June 2018 - 07:30 AM.

[Mystere]

Karl Streiger, on 14 June 2018 - 01:30 AM, said:

invented HSR

What? PGI did not invent HSR.

[Popcat]

"Also, I find it sad that while MW:LL has tanks and aerospace fighters on top of mechs, MWO does not."

I know right totally Mech Warriorthunder! I'm in!

Also trying to take a pen and paper board game and expecting it to translate 1:1 into a FPS seems a bit ill thought out to me. Basic dynamics would have to change to make it "play" better. I mean not only do you have to consider game play and function but ergonomics, play ability for both new and skilled players. MW5 is a lore game. MWO is a sand box shooter. Shooting galleries have a whiff of décor an more bang bang bang.

Can I get an urbie that shoots magic missiles?

Edited by Popcat, 15 June 2018 - 05:11 PM.

[HammerMaster]

Because lore was observed less and less. We no longer have a good game. Also. Lore nerds who played past iterations of TT and computer games (since 1989 mind you!) TOLD you clans will set you in a balance black hole! Well. Here we are.

[Johnathan Tanner]

Grus, on 13 June 2018 - 03:36 PM, said:

Lore game best game.

Your unit would know....

[MechaBattler]

If this game didn't use the lore as a framework. It would be much worse, not better. But with that said it being an online PVP game. You can't create a lopsided game. So lore has to make way for better balance.

Edited by MechaBattler, 16 June 2018 - 10:27 AM.

[Lykaon]

razenWing, on 13 June 2018 - 03:11 PM, said:

The problem with BTech lore is that there are only tanks or assassins.

Over simplified or limited grasp of tactics or limited understanding of B-tech lore?

Scout mechs are not assassins. A Raven 3L,Mongoose or Mercury make for poor combatants as does a typical Locust in "lore" In fact there is a mech in the "lore" that has no weapons at all ( OTT-7K Ostscout).

The problem with MWo is the limited scope of the game modes,match lengths and map sizes greatly reduce the neccessity of scouts or their tactical value.

Specialist mechs are also not assassins. A B-tech firestarter (FS9-A) was a specialist mech that was frequently attached on the regimental or battalion level specificly for it's capacity to start fires. A Charger was specificly designed to fill a role of ultra heavy recon and melee. A stock Charger won't be assassinating anything with a handfull of small lasers and armor that is commonly found on mechs two weight classes under it's own in MWo.

The problem is "specialist" roles in mechwarrior online generally boil down to Brawler/Sniper/LRM boat/ambush harasser and that's about it. We can't set fires for tactical advantage,we can't use melee and other specialist roles are heavily limited by a lack of rewards reflected in proper execution of the that specialist role (artillery spotter/forward observer for example)

LRM support mechs are neither tanky nor assassinate anything. Yet MWo has kicked the teeth out of LRMs as a competative weapon system all in the name of nublet preservation.

Essentially, the "lore" supports a great deal of diversity and tactical/strategic variances but MWo does NOT reflect the lore.

In MWo when selecting a successful stategic role your choices are...

Damage dealing ( at close range)
Damage dealing (at long range)
Damage dealing ( hit and run)
Damage dealing (poke and fade)

[PocketYoda]

While i'm all for lore, this game is so far from lore a good game should be first..

[HammerMaster]

No lore. No fun.
Know lore. Know fun.
As you said it's far away from lore now and has been a while.
Equals "issues"
End of story.

[Mystere]

MechaBattler, on 16 June 2018 - 10:17 AM, said:

If this game didn't use the lore as a framework. It would be much worse, not better. But with that said it being an online PVP game. You can't create a lopsided game. So lore has to make way for better balance.

Oh please! Let's put an end to this ill-advised eSports-oriented N vs. N crap.

Instead of "matches" and the never-ending obsessive search for the perfect "matchmaker", let us have battles with "reinforcements" and "reserves".

Let's have Clan formations vs. IS ones.

Lei's have a real siege mode with the classical 2:1 or 3:1 force ratio.

Not everything has to be N vs. N eSports day in and day out till the sun won't shine.

Lykaon, on 16 June 2018 - 02:02 PM, said:

The problem with MWo is the limited scope of the game modes ...

AMEN!

Edited by Mystere, 17 June 2018 - 04:43 AM.

[razenWing]

Lykaon, on 16 June 2018 - 02:02 PM, said:

Over simplified or limited grasp of tactics or limited understanding of B-tech lore?

Scout mechs are not assassins. A Raven 3L,Mongoose or Mercury make for poor combatants as does a typical Locust in "lore" In fact there is a mech in the "lore" that has no weapons at all ( OTT-7K Ostscout).

The problem with MWo is the limited scope of the game modes,match lengths and map sizes greatly reduce the neccessity of scouts or their tactical value.

Specialist mechs are also not assassins. A B-tech firestarter (FS9-A) was a specialist mech that was frequently attached on the regimental or battalion level specificly for it's capacity to start fires. A Charger was specificly designed to fill a role of ultra heavy recon and melee. A stock Charger won't be assassinating anything with a handfull of small lasers and armor that is commonly found on mechs two weight classes under it's own in MWo.

The problem is "specialist" roles in mechwarrior online generally boil down to Brawler/Sniper/LRM boat/ambush harasser and that's about it. We can't set fires for tactical advantage,we can't use melee and other specialist roles are heavily limited by a lack of rewards reflected in proper execution of the that specialist role (artillery spotter/forward observer for example)

LRM support mechs are neither tanky nor assassinate anything. Yet MWo has kicked the teeth out of LRMs as a competative weapon system all in the name of nublet preservation.

Essentially, the "lore" supports a great deal of diversity and tactical/strategic variances but MWo does NOT reflect the lore.

In MWo when selecting a successful stategic role your choices are...

Damage dealing ( at close range)
Damage dealing (at long range)
Damage dealing ( hit and run)
Damage dealing (poke and fade)

What i mean is DPS vs Tank Class in MMORPG. Specific warfare role is not in my realm of discussion. This game, after all, is a PVP FPS. Rather, if we just focus onthe PVP aspect, modern PVP games all use the concept of tank, DPS, healer, and magic dynamics to open up frame works.

Again, don't read the term literally, but what they entail. In translation, healer class just meant repair mechs. Mobile mechs. Again, not out of the realm of possibility, but definitely not a BTech lore. But is it interesting to have a dragon converted to a nurse class? Is it not more interesting that there are 4 roles that any mechs can adopt instead of meta tank vs meta DPS? I like to think so.

Magic, as I said, deployment of force multipliers. These might be your mine layers, your defensive smoke deploy, etc etc. Again, something totally within the realm of imagination and not absurd into incorporating far reaching sci-fi concepts like energy shields or bio regenerative steel.

What most of you guys are stuck with are warfare roles, like scouts, sieges, defenders, etc. What I am talking about, is more frontier to give more mechs different purposes, more way to play the game rather than just pack as much laser alpha with most armor quirks possible, etc etc.

Spider might suck with only 2 energy hardpoints. Imagine if that can be converted to a healer class to replace broken actuators for you. Now it has a purpose. Now we don't have to debate whether that mech can be fit into any roles with some other mechs capable of doing that role better. Cause that crappy spider would now be extremely vital to repair broken legs, patch armors, and salvage dead mechs for parts for instant battlefield repair... instantly shifting ties of war.

[HammerMaster]

Poppyco*k! You've described something that is NOT BattleTech. We are not here for NOT BATTLETECH!
Tank
DPS
Buffs n heals
Get that crap outta here!

[Bombast]

Mystere, on 13 June 2018 - 04:29 PM, said:

And "healing hands"? What's next, magic spells?

I cast MRM Spam!

As for the OP, it's long been requested that we get real role warfare. A reason to scout beyond finding initial enemy placement, for example. A healer though... no. Even if we were to ignore the thematic/lore issues, it just doesn't fit very well into what MWO is and the gameplay that is present.

And the last thing this game needs is another reason to be immobile and hunkering way too far in the back.