100 replies to this topic

[HammerMaster]

Spheroid, on 21 August 2018 - 04:04 PM, said:

Are you aware of how this topic is structured and what is being discussed? I am talking about equipment utility and what is required for equipment to be useful. You seem to be looking for a fight for no reason.

I will make sure to TK you if I see you out on the battlefield.

Strike a nerve?
I was merely pointing out that 1 1.5 ton item is still viable negating bonuses vs 12 mechs rather than the overpowered version that ghosts vs 12 mechs and that wanting to keep our currently broken version vs the one we SHOULD have feels like exploit seeking.

Edited by HammerMaster, 21 August 2018 - 04:23 PM.

[Dracol]

HammerMaster, on 21 August 2018 - 03:56 PM, said:

And MechWarrior is derivative of?
Oh ya BattleTech.

MWO is a sequel to Mechwarrior 4, which is a sequel to Mechwarrior 3, which is a sequel to Mechwarrior 2, with is a sequel to Mechwarrior. All take inspiration from Battletech.

To add to the the ECM / dorrito discussion.. In past Mechwarrior games they had active and passive radar, something Battletech did not go into in their core rules. (can't say 100% if they did in optional rules or not, but I'm pretty sure they didn't).

The ECM countering the ability to target a mech is reminiscent of passive radar in prior Mechwarrior games.

Edited to correct 4 misspellings of sequel... dyslexia kicked in a bit, my bad.

Edited by Dracol, 21 August 2018 - 04:15 PM.

[Prototelis]

HammerMaster, on 21 August 2018 - 03:33 PM, said:

If that sounds stupid to you ,you are not here for BattleTech but Some Other Game TM.
Those things quoted were easily translatable.

Thankyou for telling me what my opinion on the series is.

I'm here for a battletech flavored giant stompy robuts videogame.

The equipment as it is laid out in the board game has no place in this one, it has no utility. If you don't understand that you clearly aren't here to play a video game.

In general, most of the mechanics of the board game have no utility in an action game.

[HammerMaster]

Dracol, on 21 August 2018 - 04:10 PM, said:

The ECM countering the ability to target a mech is reminiscent of passive radar in prior Mechwarrior games.

Which is sorely missing from this application of MW.
MW4 is an abomination vs MW3 and it's name should NEVER be inoked.

[The6thMessenger]

Spheroid, on 21 August 2018 - 04:04 PM, said:

Are you aware of how this topic is structured and what is being discussed? I am talking about equipment utility and what is required for equipment to be useful. You seem to be looking for a fight for no reason.

I will make sure to TK you if I see you out on the battlefield.

I agree with the sentiment, but please don't stoop so low.

[HammerMaster]

Prototelis, on 21 August 2018 - 04:12 PM, said:

Thankyou for telling me what my opinion on the series is.

I'm here for a battletech flavored giant stompy robuts videogame.

The equipment as it is laid out in the board game has no place in this one, it has no utility. If you don't understand that you clearly aren't here to play a video game.

In general, most of the mechanics of the board game have no utility in an action game.

Agree to disagree.
But still sounds to me you should be elsewhere.
Your keyword being flavored.
This IP had enough juice for the full meal.

Edited by HammerMaster, 21 August 2018 - 04:18 PM.

[Dracol]

HammerMaster, on 21 August 2018 - 04:14 PM, said:

Which is sorely missing from this application of MW.

Ah, so you agree that something can be in MWO that is not directly taken from Battletech, excellent!

HammerMaster, on 21 August 2018 - 04:14 PM, said:

MW4 is an abomination vs MW3 and it's name should NEVER be inoked.

Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4, Mechwarrior 4




And just for good measure... Mechwarrior 4

[Prototelis]

HammerMaster, on 21 August 2018 - 04:15 PM, said:

Agree to disagree.
But still sounds to me you should be elsewhere.
Your keyword being flavored.
This IP had enough juice for the full meal.

Depth and lore (even though most of the lore is bad) != turn based board game rules

These are not mutually exclusive concepts.

Edit: Honestly, the IP needs a hard reboot.

Edited by Prototelis, 21 August 2018 - 04:24 PM.

[Hiten Bongz]

Let's stay on topic guys

Patch sucks; already weak missile systems needlessly over-nerfed; attempts to reign in passive LRMers via blanket-nerfing all lockons has failed, and actually backfired resulting in more harm to ATMs and Streaks than LRM utility itself, all while promoting an increase of passive potato LRM spamming by making self locks harder to obtain.

"IMMA SWANGIN' MAH NERFBATZ!!"
- PGI

Edited by Hiten Bongz, 21 August 2018 - 04:54 PM.

[Mystere]

Prototelis, on 21 August 2018 - 03:27 PM, said:

This isn't a board game.

??? Where did that come from? ???

[JediPanther]

Hiten Bongz, on 21 August 2018 - 04:52 PM, said:

Let's stay on topic guys

Patch sucks

"IMMA SWANGIN' MAH NERFBATZ!!"
- PGI

i'm borrowing this for decal suggestion sub forum.

[Shadowomega1]

brroleg, on 21 August 2018 - 11:58 AM, said:

https://physics.stac...the-lasers-beam

A good read, however it still doesn't change the fact the (M)THEL and ABL system don't show in the visible spectrum yet they put out enough energy to trigger that effect in the article. They will show in the IR spectrum though.

[Remover of Obstacles]

With 100% Radar Derp, this second lock angle nerf is a bad move.

Not a good direction to go.

[fastspec2]

pulled my streak adder out. Never a great performing mech but could be fun depending on light mech participation. Rolled around a corner, targeted an enemy, waited what seemed like a LOOOOOONG time to target, pulled trigger, dead before the buffed, faster streaks even closed the 300 meters. Back in the garage for yet another light build. I'll play boreing heavy balistic trash builds. At least its not embarrassing. way to go pgi.

[dwwolf]

Artemis changes are bolloxed up.
Spread is a nearly non existant issue for LRM10s and LRM5s. They already payed an exorbitant weight penalty to benefit from Artemis. Now they remove the only benefit from artemis that remained for them ?
Ridiculous.

Second they cut the lock on cone's diameter by 50%.....of which the real effect is that the area which you try to aim at is reduced by 75% !

I am starting to wonder if they want LRMs to function at all.

[General Solo]

Tried narc and I feel the change was good - I couldn't spam 5 or so targets like I could before with a single launcher
Should reduce the lerm crimes in FW. In solo the change is definitely felt.
But Im ok wid it, just got to be moar particular about narc shots

Remover of Obstacles, on 21 August 2018 - 07:08 PM, said:

With 100% Radar Derp, this second lock angle nerf is a bad move.

Not a good direction to go.

So people who invest all those skill points shouldn't get a return coz its not free u know

Perhaps arm mounted lrms will now be a thing

Yeah Safety Summoner we were right all along

Edited by OZHomerOZ, 22 August 2018 - 02:51 AM.

[VonBruinwald]

OZHomerOZ, on 22 August 2018 - 02:49 AM, said:

So people who invest all those skill points shouldn't get a return coz its not free u know

Derp should be 18% per node, that way decay is actually worth something vs. maximum derp.

[General Solo]

VonBruinwald, on 22 August 2018 - 03:10 AM, said:

Derp should be 18% per node, that way decay is actually worth something vs. maximum derp.

18% in your opinion
I look at it like rock paper scissors, derp beats decay, plus you CAN decay 20,40.60 and 80% derp so why not one derp the maximus that you cant decay.

And thats alot of skill points that could be cooling your weapons

Edited by OZHomerOZ, 22 August 2018 - 03:33 AM.

[Almond Brown]

Khobai, on 20 August 2018 - 03:28 PM, said:

Thanks for another patch with absolutely nothing we asked for

Who is this "we" you speak of? You meant "you" right, but just spelled it wrong?

[Moira]

Humdidum !

A general missile nerf that includes completely unwanted/needed Artemis nerf and on top of ECM buff. "Uh huh what?"

*fast sip of coffee and browsing the missile change log from the last year. And another sip of coffee*

I understand that big pile of streaks can be single click death to a light mech, but that falls mainly into light pilots error to run into those in the first place. New Coolant change doesnt do alot maybe few load outs that use alot of RAC's or UAC's will feel this is direct as FU on the face, but thats not that game changing.

But the artemis change as many have mentioned does indeed propel ppls to stay back and not to face-tank and piss missiles... daadaadaa... weird since this goes totally against what should have been done.

Over all not so game changing, but this leaves me totally dumb found for direction that PGI/devs are trying to push ? left or right or back ???

----
Now totally different approach for this. *A refill for my dear coffee cup*

Im "trying" to step backwards and look this years general direction for buffs and nerfs to see where these changes are coming from and what is causing em. Sure its been shown that in FW LRM's have caused certain havoc and that isnt wanted... so some missile nerfs are ok, then again later missiles are getting buffed and now again nerfed =) feels hilarious.

I could suspect that most of these changes are made to "balance" (iron out) the next upcoming MWO's big tournament (is there even one coming ??? didnt check that) with sledgehammer so that none of the teams can have some hideously effective and hidden missile based drop deck tactic that totally blows out the rest. Thou most the E-Sports today are trying to create more and more variety to their "brand" and give players more options and thou creating more entertaining experience to viewers/customers.

Shrug just my thoughts on the matter.

Moira from [LURM]