75 replies to this topic

[TheMisled]

Apparently for some, the only type of skill that exists is the ability to react fast and aim well. A Long TTK requires a different kind of skill; the skill to be able to tactically assess a situation, make effective use of your team and turn the odds in your favour by any means. If you're being ganged up on by two players then do something about it. The fact they they decided to group up on you is a sign of skilled decision making and trying the increase thier odds of winning. Counter this by trying to only engage one at a time, sticking with teammates or if that doesn't work break away from the engagement (smart players will try not to put them selve in a position they can't get out of).

Individaul skill also matters, aim and the ability to manouver and manage your mech will certaintly make a difference in a fight and like I said before, making use of your team and thier positions is also something you have to do for yourself, this stuff won't just fall into your lap. Losing a few teammates also does not mean the end of a match by any means (unless your team really ****** up). I myself have gone 1v6 and still won in a light mech before now and that was simply becuase I was a much better pilot.

My guess is you're trying to play this game in a way that doesn't suit it and them and then blaming the fact that said methods (that may work in other games) and the high TTK all while failing to realise the real underlying problems you're having.

[R Valentine]

TheMisled, on 12 July 2018 - 03:29 PM, said:

Apparently for some, the only type of skill that exists is the ability to react fast and aim well. A Long TTK requires a different kind of skill; the skill to be able to tactically assess a situation, make effective use of your team and turn the odds in your favour by any means. If you're being ganged up on by two players then do something about it. The fact they they decided to group up on you is a sign of skilled decision making and trying the increase thier odds of winning. Counter this by trying to only engage one at a time, sticking with teammates or if that doesn't work break away from the engagement (smart players will try not to put them selve in a position they can't get out of).

Individaul skill also matters, aim and the ability to manouver and manage your mech will certaintly make a difference in a fight and like I said before, making use of your team and thier positions is also something you have to do for yourself, this stuff won't just fall into your lap. Losing a few teammates also does not mean the end of a match by any means (unless your team really ****** up). I myself have gone 1v6 and still won in a light mech before now and that was simply becuase I was a much better pilot.

My guess is you're trying to play this game in a way that doesn't suit it and them and then blaming the fact that said methods (that may work in other games) and the high TTK all while failing to realise the real underlying problems you're having.

"Aim well" is putting it generously. The kind of play style he wants is react first and generally place the crosshairs over the torso. MWO isn't just about being the first to the gun and making a half-decent shot. It's about making several well placed shots in a row on one target. It's consistency of skill and marksmanship that wins the day, not just being the first to get a shot on the enemy. You need multiple shots in the same spot to destroy a component or land a kill. Consistency is key, not reaction time.

[Prototelis]

It doesn't matter how much you slow down the game.

Being able to react quickly is always going to be one of the foremost skills to have in any FPS.

One thing that makes this game unique is that those skills, while important, don't win the game on their own.


I personally think TTK is fine. The risk vs reward element in place is very satisfying.

Make bad decisions; get wrecked within seconds
Play smart; Generally do better

Thats how the multiplayer aspect of this series has always played and it should stay that way.

[Hauptmann Keg Steiner]

DrtyDshSoap, on 12 July 2018 - 12:56 AM, said:

No, a strawman would be more along the lines of this; "I think the Last Jedi is a terrible movie"
"Yeah well, so were the prequels. What was George Lucas's excuse?"

No, that's appeal to hypocrisy, aka whataboutism.

[Anjian]

SaltiestRaccoon, on 11 July 2018 - 04:30 PM, said:

Yes, some people play the game with premades of good players who will listen and act in a coordinated, intelligent fashion. Again, like most of the mouth-breathers in this thread, you're resorting to ad hominem because you can't actually debate the fact that lower TTK DOES favor better players. I don't want a trophy for my current skill. Just the opposite. If those players are so much better, then they should kill me even faster with a lower TTK. I don't even think I'm that good at the game, but that doesn't change the fact that lower TTK allows better players to flourish. Attack me all you want, but that won't do ANYTHING to diminish the solid fact that a lower TTK gives more favor to better players in asymmetrical engagements.

I don't know. Either the game is single spawn with a high TTK, or low TTK with multiple respawn.

I believe that 'skill' should also be the repeated, consistent and persistent exercise of such. That's why tennis is three sets with a set of six games, a boxing match is 12 rounds, an NBA Championship game is 4 games out of 7. Imagine if a game ends the moment which team gets to score first.

Some games have varied TTK. World of Warships, for example, it takes a long time to gun down a battleship, but it can be wiped out in a near instant by a spread of torpedoes.

[MTier Slayed Up]

IdToaster, on 12 July 2018 - 08:00 PM, said:

No, that's appeal to hypocrisy, aka whataboutism.

The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition.

Argument: Last Jedi is a terrible movie.
Strawman: The prequels were bad movies too though.

I can't break this down barney style any more than I already have.

The TTK is nearly fine. I think having good aim should be rewarded with a relatively short TTK or at least moderately. Using Gauss for example, hitting a moving target consistently in the same component should feel rewarding, and it is, imo.
Gripes that I do have -
I kind of hate the idea of Clan mechs being the perfect definition of a class cannon. Clan 100 tonners are so bad, there's no reason to take them out unless you're just goofing off. Yeah, they can boat some absurd things, but IS 100 tonners just dump on them. The Annie reigns supreme because it can boat both a crap ton of firepower AND is absurdly tanky AND has some decent hitboxes. On one end, totally understand why the Kodi needed the nerf with it's quad AC-10, on another hand though, it's armor values are just abysmal, as is it's hit boxes...and it's torso twisting.
I also think there should be some buffs in weaponry on the Inner Spheres side regarding their laser vomit, rather than relying on ballistics/missiles/gauss. I remember a time when I could take a Black Knight out and not struggle to be relevant...I bought the hero variant when I made my return a few months ago to see if I could rock a gauss vomit with it and it's...underwhelming.

Like, I get the nerf, totally am behind some of it like C-ERM outperforming everything across the board. That should stop. Clan gauss though being an issue and adding recoil because of...No reason? That's silly. Buff ER-Mediums. I'm not going to take them due to the heat just to add a few extra meters. Buff Micro-Pulse. Can just kill the ghost heat on it and they might actually be relevant. Buff mediums so they don't have paper for armor. I have no idea why, but the only mediums I feel like that can really stay relevant are the ones with terrible hitboxes like the BushyBrows or Assassins. Everything else just feels like an upgraded light without the armor.

TL:DR - Buff some things rather than just nerfing things into the dirt (RIP Timber Wolf).

Edited by DrtyDshSoap, 13 July 2018 - 12:00 AM.

[Hauptmann Keg Steiner]

DrtyDshSoap, on 12 July 2018 - 11:56 PM, said:

The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition.

More or less correct, yes.

Quote

Argument: Last Jedi is a terrible movie.
Strawman: The prequels were bad movies too though.

I can't break this down barney style any more than I already have.

Annnd that's still not a strawman. A strawman would be more like this:

Argument: Last Jedi is a terrible movie.
Strawman: I don't like Last Jedi because it's not the original movies.
Knockdown: The arguer simply wallows in nostalgia and can't appreciate anything that isn't the classics. Opinion discarded.

Going 'yeah but thing B is cancer' when someone says 'thing A is bad' is an entirely different fallacy.

[Chados]

Seems to me that the OP wants a game where he can one-shot half the enemy team all on his own. I think TTK is in a better place now than in a long while. It used to be a lot worse. There aren’t a lot of players that want a mech game where you’re one-shot dead from an un-seen assailant 25 seconds after the drop starts.

[MTier Slayed Up]

IdToaster, on 13 July 2018 - 03:18 AM, said:

Stuff

We'll just agree to disagree and move on.

[Christophe Ivanov]

If we could have respawn in game, I would not mind the nerfing as much as I do at the moment. Like that's gonna happen.

Actually, a repair station would be nice.

Edited by Christophe Ivanov, 13 July 2018 - 10:50 AM.

[dwwolf]

MWO has a TTK problem insofar that it has guaranteed pinpoint damage application.

TT <> MWO balance, as far as it exists ( TT has balance problems inherent to the tech levels ), resolves around the fact that in TT damage application is random, and the worst hit ratio is for location 7 ( CT frontally ) at ~1/6 of total hits. In MWO we generally choose the location that we hit. Now weapons are sped up 2 - 3 times compared to TT and our armor is a 2x higher as a baseline
Weapon perks and skills roughly balance out armor perks and skills.

In other words average CT armor, relative to the weapons damage is atleast 6x higher in battletech TT. Now the exact ratio is different for arms legs and side torso. But the 6x is good indication.

[Anjian]

dwwolf, on 13 July 2018 - 05:18 AM, said:

MWO has a TTK problem insofar that it has guaranteed pinpoint damage application. TT <> MWO balance, as far as it exists ( TT has balance problems inherent to the tech levels ), resolves around the fact that in TT damage application is random, and the worst hit ratio is for location 7 ( CT frontally ) at ~1/6 of total hits. In MWO we generally choose the location that we hit. Now weapons are sped up 2 - 3 times compared to TT and our armor is a 2x higher as a baseline Weapon perks and skills roughly balance out armor perks and skills. In other words average CT armor, relative to the weapons damage is atleast 6x higher in battletech TT. Now the exact ratio is different for arms legs and side torso. But the 6x is good indication.

MWO should have had a bloom based targeting. By what I mean bloom based, you have to be familiar with Fortnite or World of Tanks.


You have this bloom circle that appears on the target. When you fire, your shots would fall randomly within the bloom. As the bloom contracts, firing it within the contraction period makes the shot even more accurate right until the bloom is at its smallest. However, you cannot fire instantly you have to wait till the bloom contracts. This forces you to either wait for pin point accuracy, or fire hastily and be randomly accurate or inaccurate.

However, bloom based targeting can also be controversial as some people truly don't like it.

Edited by Anjian, 14 July 2018 - 09:41 PM.

[El Bandito]

If I wanted low TTK and carry games solo, I would be playing CS:GO. I want mechs in MWO to be more durable than that of average FPS characters.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Nema Nabojiv, on 11 July 2018 - 04:32 AM, said:

Former WoT player reporting in.

In Wot you absolutely can carry against agains 3 to 5 enemies thanks to combination of various mechanics like true armor, visibility, cone of fire and huge disparities in mobility. They even have the achievement for 1vs5 carry iirc. It is hard but not impossible.

I wouldn't want MWO to be that extreme, but the one thing they did right in wot is that you skill matter a lot more, eventhough theres more people in the mach than in mwo.

A Tank has only a Maincanon ´..here a Mech has enough Weapons for a Tankplatoon ......most im lived by good Matches to end with only 34 % of Armor ...have +800 dmg and 2-3 Kills of my site with a good team thatsnot only LRM Assault backstander or "Brawl-Only" suicid Players.
longer TTK ?! play only against the magical Power of Dices in TT who Shots missed when a 12 m tall machine is running with 60!!!! kmh in 300 m or who a Pilot not can aim the Cockpit from a shutdown Antagonist in 30m (hey thats stupid blind Gunners)or in older MW titles against Stupid AI.

For simulate the TT we must fight without Monitors or the weapons must spread like a Shotgun in 300m ..12 m Mechs with Weapons tahts not can hit a Scyscraper in 200m?

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 16 July 2018 - 02:35 AM.

[Wil McCullough]

dwwolf, on 13 July 2018 - 05:18 AM, said:

MWO has a TTK problem insofar that it has guaranteed pinpoint damage application.

TT &lt;&gt; MWO balance, as far as it exists ( TT has balance problems inherent to the tech levels ), resolves around the fact that in TT damage application is random, and the worst hit ratio is for location 7 ( CT frontally ) at ~1/6 of total hits. In MWO we generally choose the location that we hit. Now weapons are sped up 2 - 3 times compared to TT and our armor is a 2x higher as a baseline
Weapon perks and skills roughly balance out armor perks and skills.

In other words average CT armor, relative to the weapons damage is atleast 6x higher in battletech TT. Now the exact ratio is different for arms legs and side torso. But the 6x is good indication.

Tt ttk is a lot lower than in mwo. Like 3 times lower even without.pinpoint damage. Hbs's bt game is pretty close to tt. In hbs bt, your lance of 4 mechs can take on two other lances of enemy mechs (8 in total) and still finish a game in 7-8 turns. Each turn is a representation of about 10 sec. With maneuvering and movement included, that's less than a minute of fighting.

Most players who say tt ttk is high are misremembering. Traditional tt takes ages to get anything done. Moving the pieces, checking for line of sight, rolling the dice, noting everything down on paper etc. But when the smoke clears, multiple mechs will be in pieces in just a single turn aka 10 sec.

[Kaeb Odellas]

SaltiestRaccoon, on 10 July 2018 - 08:37 PM, said:

... And it's not what you think.

So let me preface this slightly. How many of you find it frustrating that even if you place your shots well, twist when you should and utilize cover and movement well, you will still lose almost every time to 2 or more potatoes face-tanking you?

The lengthy TTK in MWO has created a metagame where individual skill is almost meaningless in asymmetric engagements, and this hurts the game in many different ways

The first, is that it's extremely frustrating, as I mentioned before to lose to players that you know to be worse than you based on the play they display.

The second, is a huge snowball effect. If one team loses a few mechs early, they will lose the game... almost invariably. With massed fire being the only way to quickly destroy mechs, having several extra mechs worth of firepower is a hard obstacle to overcome. As a result of the first few mechs being such a giant advantage, the skirmish phase of a battle is grossly overemphasized, making brawlers significantly less fun to play, as the battle is often decided before you get a chance to pull the trigger on those SRMs

Third, a long TTK makes positioning feel far less rewarding. It should feel great to catch a team from behind. Like being in a shooting gallery, but as it stands, you're lucky if you manage to core out one mech before a team turns around and forces you to retreat.

Fourth... And this is probably the biggest point... What makes a game fun to play or watch? You don't watch football for the perfectly executed plays that go completely according to plan. You're watching it for that huge punt return for a touchdown. You don't remember the games you played where you absolutely stomped the other team, you remember the ones where you nearly lost and fought your way to a win against all odds. Excitement and fun requires that a game allow for an unexpected outcome or event. When numerical superiority means so much more than any individual pilot skill, there is virtually no chance to see or experience those big plays.

The developers and many members of the community feel that the TTK is too low. I couldn't disagree more. When I quit playing shortly after beta, it was due to the TTK problem... and after coming back to it after five years, it still exists.

One good pilot should be able to kill several inferior ones in a straight up fight. Those last two or three mechs should be able to run it back against an enemy team, but that's not the way the game works presently and virtually every game can be called as soon as one team gains a three kill lead or so.

So the detractors to the 'low TTK' argument will always cite one of two things in response, and both are completely wrong or misleading:

The first complaint is always, 'This is Mechwarrior, not Call of Duty. You should have long fights.' Completely wrong. ANYONE who has played previous entries in the series is being either dishonest with themselves or others. Most older entries in the Mechwarrior series used tabletop weapon AND armor values. This meant mechs had less than half the HP they do in MWO. On top of that in MWO, add in further damage-limiting in the form of ghost heat, and less effective heatsinks.

The second complaint is always, 'But individual player skill is better exemplified with higher TTK because it allows more decisions to be made in a fight.' Yes, that is true, but it is only true for 1 on 1 engagements. Because mass damage is so much more important than maneuver, twisting, shot placement or anything else, in MWO two inferior players will beat a better player the majority of the time. This is a problem with the game, for all the reasons stated above. If you want to see a wider gap between good and bad players, then lower TTK is the answer, not higher. Higher TTK is probably totally acceptable for Solaris type gameplay where the game is 1 on 1 and lower TTK favors the lesser player. The fact of the matter is that MWO is a team game and two mechs duking it out without outside interference rarely, if ever, happens

All this developer talk about lowering alpha damage and raising TTK just reeks of a style of game where the epitome of skill is simply assembling a 12 man team such that you can maximize fire, then calling out a good target priority. That is neither fun, nor is it Mechwarrior, and it never has been and never will be what Mechwarrior should be.

Higher TTK actually benefits higher skill. Here's why.

Take the following scenario: Two mechs with identical loadouts square off in a 1v1 match. One mech is piloted by a T1 competitive player, while the other is a newbie T5 who just got out of their cadet matches.

Under ordinary conditions, the T1 has a 100% win rate against T5. The more skilled player can hit more consistently, target specific components, and mitigate damage with twisting and cover.

However, if one were to reduce both mechs to 0.1 HP in each component, such that even a glancing blow will take it down, the match comes down to who sees the other guy first. Now T5 actually has a chance, despite being considerably less skilled than T1.