77 replies to this topic

[VonBruinwald]

Prototelis, on 25 April 2019 - 03:03 PM, said:

Arcade game and Action game aren't mutually exclusive terms. However this game is far from being an arcade game.

MW4, by far, was more arcadey than this is.

If you has said MechAssault I would have agreed but MW4?

Sure, if you only played the NH/UA mixed tech servers it was more arcadey (especially with respawn), but this game has a lot of one-click warriors who would only use Direstars if they could get away with it...

MW4 was far more complex, infotech was alive with every-mech having it's own LOS radar, BAP could cut through structures (but not terrain), ECM countering BAP and IFF turning everyone green (or blue in MWO terms)! Each mech had unique loadouts due to the pod system as they couldn't sport the same builds, even with omnipods.

I still remember the time me and some random pugs suited up in battle armour and spent 20min bringing a Nova Cat down in Solaris. Arcadey, maybe, but damn was it fun!

I also remember the last 1v1 tourney we ran, the fights took noticeably longer as there was less alpha-play and more tactics involved.

Edited by VonBruinwald, 26 April 2019 - 06:04 AM.

[Prototelis]

Bro. The meta in MW4 was non-stop alpha warrior. You could two shot ANYTHING in the game with large lasers.

[evilauthor]

WrathOfDeadguy, on 26 April 2019 - 02:15 AM, said:

TT mechanics do not translate well to games where targeting is based on player skill rather than dice rolls serving as a stand-in for the actions of a third-party (non-player) pilot.

I can think of two ways to encode TT's random hit location mechanics into MWO without actually using a number generator.

1) Imperfect convergence. Doesn't make landing hits all in one spot impossible, but it does raise the skill bar to do so considerably.

2) Force chain fire. Group fire is no longer allowed. Players are forced to fire their weapons one or a few at a time. Which actually simulates independent to-hit rolls for each individual weapon pretty well.

For some reason, PGI has zero interest in implementing either idea.

[HammerMaster]

Prototelis, on 25 April 2019 - 09:24 PM, said:

.

[Bloodwitch]

evilauthor, on 26 April 2019 - 03:41 PM, said:

For some reason, PGI has zero interest in implementing either idea.

I hope this is sarcasm.

[Karl Streiger]

evilauthor, on 26 April 2019 - 03:41 PM, said:

2) Force chain fire. Group fire is no longer allowed. Players are forced to fire their weapons one or a few at a time. Which actually simulates independent to-hit rolls for each individual weapon pretty well.

For some reason, PGI has zero interest in implementing either idea.

Considering that the Gaussian Bell Curve is as alive in MWO as it is in TT this might work.
(Difference is the peak - to hit values for laser are somewhere in the 80 percentage LRMs peak at 11%)
Lasers damage per shot value do not differ from weapons with flight time.

About the topic, it's never a good idea to modify values you don't understand

Unfortunately never got my hands on numbers for hit locations. Of course this had to be different for each chassis but I expect a Bell Curve as well.

Side note, the average MWO pilot has a gunnery of 3 when put into TT

Edited by Karl Streiger, 26 April 2019 - 09:39 PM.

[Dee Eight]

The only thing that needs softening is the ridiculous min range weapons which do zero damage... which ISN"T actually how they worked in the battletech lore. Min ranges affected accuracy... NOT damage. An LRM20 fired at a target 1 hex away could still do up to 20 damage (dependent of course on how you rolled on the cluster hits table), it just had a really high to-hit roll # that needed to be rolled on 2D6.

[Karl Streiger]

Dee Eight, on 26 April 2019 - 11:42 PM, said:

The only thing that needs softening is the ridiculous min range weapons which do zero damage... which ISN"T actually how they worked in the battletech lore. Min ranges affected accuracy... NOT damage. An LRM20 fired at a target 1 hex away could still do up to 20 damage (dependent of course on how you rolled on the cluster hits table), it just had a really high to-hit roll # that needed to be rolled on 2D6.

and they worked this way in CB with the steep arch the LRMs had issues to hit anything up close, same for PPC it dealt damage but because of PPCHexalkers they dropped the damage and then they did 100%heat damage idiocy and finally added Ghost Heat.
(GH made no damage at minimum range and 100%heat damage tripple stupid, but stated in game for the reason that nobody seem to bother to remove them)

But Gauss or ACs should do zero damage as well, or is something special with those?

[Bloodwitch]

Karl Streiger, on 26 April 2019 - 09:38 PM, said:

Side note, the average MWO pilot has a gunnery of 3 when put into TT

That diss was lit.

[Apocal43]

Bloodwitch, on 27 April 2019 - 02:39 AM, said:

That diss was lit.

Isn't really a diss though, since that means half the players are 2 gunnery or better, which is just about the skill level that some TT grogs start to get salty about how it changes the game.

[Bloodwitch]

Apocal43, on 27 April 2019 - 02:50 AM, said:

Isn't really a diss though, since that means half the players are 2 gunnery or better, which is just about the skill level that some TT grogs start to get salty about how it changes the game.

nvm, i somehow was stuck on HBS system. As for TT it counts backward.

Edited by Bloodwitch, 27 April 2019 - 03:44 AM.

[General Solo]

I play a few matches private lobby matches with values the same as TT, same armour, same weapons, same ammo and placement of the previous.

It was brutal.

An AC5 or LRM10 was pretty deadly, TTL was short, the first shot was devastating even with piddly weapons.

Mistakes were punished

A dude could wipe out a lance if he was good with his shots and quick about it. Didnt need high alpha to be effective as armour was low/stock.

Edited by OZHomerOZ, 27 April 2019 - 04:16 AM.

[Weeny Machine]

MechaBattler, on 24 April 2019 - 10:23 AM, said:

I think they've softened it enough, while still sticking to the lore enough that it's not Titanfall, or some other shallow mech game. I think everything is fine the way it is. The only one I would make a case for is the LBX20. H-Gauss is potent enough that it needs the restrictions. LBX20 on the other hand doesn't really. I mean it's cooler and has no ghost heat. But being stuck using standard engines makes it mostly a weapon in the domain of assaults and some heavies. Lighter mechs need the weight savings of LFE or XL and LBX20 doesn't bring enough to warrant the loss.

In Battletech you could split crits into other locations

[Mystere]

Karl Streiger, on 27 April 2019 - 12:08 AM, said:

But Gauss or ACs should do zero damage as well, or is something special with those?

Having a bullet do 0 damage at point blank range just does not compute.

[Khobai]

zero damage deadzones need to be removed

it should be replaced with linear damage reduction down to a minimum of 50% damage.

no weapon should ever do 0 damage at short range, its not a fun game mechanic, there is absolutely no basis for it in battletech (firing under the min range just reduces accuracy in battletech it doesnt reduce damage in the slightest and certainly doesnt reduce damage to zero) and it makes no sense in MWO anyway.

also the fact PGI is totally inconsistent about enforcing min ranges throws into question about why we even have min ranges in the first place (gauss is supposed to have a min range but doesnt, so why do PPCs have a min range but not gauss? thats arbitrary and inconsistent). But if PGI insists on doing the min range thing it certainly shouldnt result in zero damage situations.

Edited by Khobai, 27 April 2019 - 06:50 AM.

[LT. HARDCASE]

The IS LB20 should absolutely be changed to 10 slots, since it is PGI's fault that they can't code crit splitting.

Right now we are forced to introduce some mechs that come stock with LB20s with AC20s instead, or completely avoid them altogether. Why are these the better options?

Lore mechs can rock LB20s with XLs and LFEs and can use them in their arms. We have a mech in game (Thanatos 4P) that should've come with an LB20 in its left arm, but PGI had to swap it for an AC20 to include the variant in the mech pack.

That is the only weapon I see that needs a change.

[Y E O N N E]

FupDup, on 25 April 2019 - 07:34 AM, said:

Actually no, since Machine Guns don't have any critical hit bonuses in the "lore" values referenced by this thread. They would just have 0.2 DPS, which would be kinda sad (even when accounting for armor and structure getting reduced back to TT levels).

MGs are not the only Piranhas.

[FupDup]

Y E O N N E, on 27 April 2019 - 11:40 AM, said:

MGs are not the only Piranhas.

I interpreted your comment to be referencing the critical hit bonuses of MWO MGs, because I don't think the TT critical hit rates on normal weapons (even laser-boating Piranhas) would be high enough to consistently kill assaults immediately upon armor breach with yellow structure in all body parts (although of course random is random so sometimes it would happen, just not that often).

But let's not get too wrapped up in this nitpick here because TT does have a ton of horribly balanced weapon stats and it would suck popsickles to have MWO copy-paste every single value without deviation. We agree on that.

Edited by FupDup, 27 April 2019 - 12:06 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

FupDup, on 27 April 2019 - 12:03 PM, said:

I interpreted your comment to be referencing the critical hit bonuses of MWO MGs, because I don't think the TT critical hit rates on normal weapons (even laser-boating Piranhas) would be high enough to consistently kill assaults immediately upon armor breach with yellow structure in all body parts (although of course random is random so sometimes it would happen, just not that often).

But let's not get too wrapped up here because TT does have a ton of horribly balanced weapon stats and it would suck popsickles to have MWO copy-paste every single value without deviation.

Depends. Unless you are going to set the HP unnaturally high, it doesn't take much to kill a piece of equipment. You don't have to take all of its HP in one shot.

If it's not the Piranhas taking out your engine with a hilarious number of rolls per second, it will be the big ballistics. Either way, engine crits are not the answer, never were, and never will be.

[FupDup]

Y E O N N E, on 27 April 2019 - 12:09 PM, said:

Depends. Unless you are going to set the HP unnaturally high, it doesn't take much to kill a piece of equipment. You don't have to take all of its HP in one shot.

If it's not the Piranhas taking out your engine with a hilarious number of rolls per second, it will be the big ballistics. Either way, engine crits are not the answer, never were, and never will be.

If we go by the thread's decree of using "lore" values, then most items would be destroyed when critically hit by any weapon and all weapons would have the same crit damage and chance per projectile (i.e. Small Laser has same crit damage and crit chance as an AC/20). Engines would be destroyed by any three critical hits.

LB-X spam would probably achieve the engine crit instagib result because each projectile gets its own crit chance (i.e. LB 10-X has the same critting power as 10 Medium Lasers) and MWO aiming would let us direct those projectiles into a much smaller space than TT's hit tables which spread everything everywhere. SRMs would also be good at this because each missile gets its own crit roll.

Quad LBX meta confirmed...

Actually it's already meta but that's beside the point.

Edited by FupDup, 27 April 2019 - 12:20 PM.