Jump to content

Question : Why Play Mwo Anymore ?


13 replies to this topic

#1 FlareUKCS

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 233 posts
  • LocationWales , UK.

Posted 11 May 2019 - 06:09 PM

Seriously the game is based on table top rules so aiming is random hence why a Atlas is an Assualt. In MWO a Atlas is just another CT to aim and destroy.
Why play slow 'tanky' mechs when the skill of aiming wrecks what was balanced in the table top rules? In table top you could not nearly always hit the enemy let alone pick off the CT but in MWO you can core the enemy assaults easier than the lights.

I don't pretend to have the solution but there is definitely a problem.

I know I know you can minimise the issue with good positioning or manoeuvres but still when a assault is weaker than a light in a straight up fight its a problem.
Solving that issue though is harder than what I can come up with.
No one wants a randomizer to their shots, but with precise aim the tough assaults ain't so tough.

Am I wrong ?

#2 HenryFA

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 192 posts
  • LocationHunting down LRM assaults

Posted 11 May 2019 - 06:17 PM

Ask yourself a question?

Why are you still playing the game?

Because if the art style? Lore? Gameplay?

I like playing this game, because I like the idea of piloting my fav mech inside its cockpit
And I like games that require me to aim well for rewarding results(just like all shooter)


#3 FlareUKCS

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 233 posts
  • LocationWales , UK.

Posted 11 May 2019 - 06:41 PM

I like playing the game, but you have to be blind to not notice the abundance of core kills, and most of them are heavy and assault.They, for the most part, are suppose to be tough but with precise aim they are not.

Look I am not attacking PGi here, this is an issue I don't have a solution for but tough mechs are not tough in this game due to FPS mechanics.

Look at vanilla, stock Battletech game on Steam, a heavy or assault is bloody tough, but only due to random fire... in MWO you can cleam up the same mechs easily with some precise CT fire.

Watch how many mechs fall to CT's ...even those without the XL engines, its just straight CT coring.

#4 HenryFA

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 192 posts
  • LocationHunting down LRM assaults

Posted 11 May 2019 - 07:58 PM

uhhh , sorry but you confused me with the point of "many mechs fall to CT's"
which makes me checked your stats on Jarls...

In my Tier 1-2 matches experience,
unless people are derping super hard, their mech seldom get CT'ed...
or they are in a mech with poor overall hitbix, such as the Dragon

A decent MWO player will know how to torso twist and spread incoming damage
If people are able to pinpoint your CT with everyshot, you're doing something wrong...

Atlas can be stupidity tanky with good piloting... Yet, Atlas is also really squishy if you decide not to torso twist at all


#5 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 11 May 2019 - 09:09 PM

View PostFlareUKCS, on 11 May 2019 - 06:09 PM, said:

Seriously the game is based on table top rules so aiming is random hence why a Atlas is an Assualt. In MWO a Atlas is just another CT to aim and destroy.
Why play slow 'tanky' mechs when the skill of aiming wrecks what was balanced in the table top rules? In table top you could not nearly always hit the enemy let alone pick off the CT but in MWO you can core the enemy assaults easier than the lights.

Aiming isn't random in tabletop.
Movement of both yourself and the enemy is taken into account in the difficulty of each shot, the machines are smaller than that of BT [the typical assault mech being 14 meters or less until you get into the darkages... at the moment we have some lights that are almost 14 meters tall], and finally any shot fired at a mech can be deflected, dodged, or ineffective.

Mechs don't just stand and take hits, they can block.

They will attempt to dodge attacks. (This is one of the leading reasons why the statistically superior 8 ton, identical range, 6 damage to armor 9 damage to structure Heavy Rifle is considered obsolete and inferior; a single bulky projectile is very hit or miss and easily dodged, but an AC pumps out dozens of shells over several seconds from the painfully slow 3-4 shells per second (3 to net 5 damage) of an AC/5 GM Whirlwind/5 to the rapid 12.5 shells/second [25 total to net 5 damage] of the 40mm Pontiac Light). Much harder to dodge them.)

Hitting trees can reduce the damage of your attack, assuming that they don't reduce your chance to actually hit to zero.

Even with automatic weaponry, a miss in tabletop doesn't necessarily mean a complete miss, but potentially a lack of any tangible weight to the attack worth recording. Afterall, damage isn't tracked in decimals.

In MWO.. Sure mechs should be doing this somewhat automatically, and it'd be a lot easier to reflect it with lore-friendly weapons instead of Super-Heavy "Mech Rifles" as we have in MWO which PGI calls Autocannons. We also have instant convergence, where tabletop's Solaris 7 shows us that you set convergence. Fluff-wise you could do this on the fly, but by default in tabletop its to the middle-ground of what you have, (for example 270 meters, even with large lasers and small lasers in the mix). If under that range, the weapons either hit center of what you were aiming at or adjacent to it according to which side the weapon is on. (I.E. if you net "CT" on your roll, and the target is under your set convergence, your left torso lasers might hit CT or the enemy's RT. Course if you missed your roll, every weapon in that group missed because they're fired at the same time rather than tabletop's standard one at a time. If the target is beyond the range of a specific weapon in the group, the weapon simply doesn't fire when you use the group).

Plenty of solutions are out there, but PGI would have to 1) give two shits and 2) actually care about, read, and utilize the fluff... which they really don't. The original head of balancing admits he played tabletop for an hour....4 or 5 years ago.

Quote

I know I know you can minimise the issue with good positioning or manoeuvres but still when a assault is weaker than a light in a straight up fight its a problem.

Welcome to "fair gameplay."
It wouldn't be fair if the light didn't have a chance. But to be honest a non-meta setup designed to deal with lights rather than maximum damage output against other assaults and heavies can easily deal with your light issue. The problem is being equipped for the situation. Meta demands maximum performance against a specified target or a general target. But lacking any anti-light capabilities is bound to leave you in that situation. SPLs, MGs, Streaks, MPLs in some cases, and either high velocity PPCs, LBX with the skill tree nodes for it activated, or an AC/20 with some patience will do amazing wonders. Aim for legs, and for the love of ******* god if you have lower arm actuators UNLOCK them (and relock as soon as you break their leg for the quick kill). Arms track faster than any mech can run, but a locked pair of arms slows down your torso twist.

Quote

No one wants a randomizer to their shots, but with precise aim the tough assaults ain't so tough.


No randomizer needed. Tabletop is only random to reflect pilot skill and the situation in a summary of 10 seconds (2.5 in Solaris 7, which is why dodging/etc. is manual in it instead of automatically assumed).

#6 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 11 May 2019 - 09:12 PM

(You'll note in tabletop, you can call "aimed shots" in only two conditions. 1] The pilot is unconscious. Techmanual, cockpit section, states that a Battlemech cannot act on its own without interpreting the intention of the pilot. ....An unconscious pilot has no intentions. 2] The Battlemech either has no power, or is in a compromised position such as being prone or rendered immobile. Without power a battlemech cannot dodge or block an incoming attack. In a prone position, a battlemech hardly has the ability to dodge anything.)

(Also fun: The reason hits are so prone to land on arms in tabletop, quite simply, is because mechs are blocking with them.)

Further supporting condition 2 here: Battletech Battlemech Manual, a 2018 compilation of ALL Battlemech related rules, generic design quirks, etc....

Posted Image
Even with a movement of zero, you cannot call an aimed shot because even within that 30 meter hex, the Battlemech has plenty of space to thrash around in (and thus dodge fire)...and as such cannot be considered immobile. (Which is part of the Battlemech being in a compromising position, i.e. no power, prone, and immobile)

Edited by Koniving, 11 May 2019 - 09:18 PM.


#7 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 14 May 2019 - 11:22 PM

Quote

Seriously the game is based on table top rules so aiming is random hence why a Atlas is an Assualt. In MWO a Atlas is just another CT to aim and destroy.
Why play slow 'tanky' mechs when the skill of aiming wrecks what was balanced in the table top rules? In table top you could not nearly always hit the enemy let alone pick off the CT but in MWO you can core the enemy assaults easier than the lights.


You not wrong. Precise aiming created all sorts of issues in MWO that the developers still struggle with to this day.

The problem is PGI needed to redistribute the armor values based on CTs and STs getting hit more often due to precise aiming. And unfortunately they never did that... they just did a flat x2 armor/structure which was entirely insufficient to combat how overpowered precise aiming is.

Thats basically how ghost heat came about. Because x2 armor/structure wasnt cutting it, they created ghost heat to try and limit alphastrikes. The problem is ghost heat has so many loopholes and only partially works (allowing crap like dual gauss + 6 med lasers is a HUGE loophole).

I think if PGI closed off the obvious loopholes with ghost heat we might end up with a system that works. It would still be a super awkward system though and everyone HATES ghost heat. But it would probably work.

Edited by Khobai, 14 May 2019 - 11:32 PM.


#8 Karl Streiger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 20,369 posts
  • LocationBlack Dot in a Sea of Blue

Posted 15 May 2019 - 02:18 AM

Some years back I ran the MWO PPCs into TT by using some alternate rule sets.
So the PPC aimed for the CT with a to hit mod of +2 if the roll was successful it hit the CT, if the roll was not successful it had the ability to hit anyhow (+1 - torso, +-0 whole mech)
and the result was quite similar to what you had in MWO back then (2013 I believe)

problem is damage rolling doesn't work so great for PPCs and other PPFL weapons.

Precise aiming would not be an issue with correct size based armor per location. (What was done to the JaegerMech with highly reduced armor on the arms for additional side torso armor)

What also might have worked - overlapping locations so a hit close to a "location" border might deal damage to both zones. Or no location borders placed by a ruler. when parts of the CT spread into the sides, and sides would connect in other parts - or arms reach into the torso and torso elements into the arms you would have also more spread (and the good guys had a much smaller target if they want to place their shots into a single location)

Edited by Karl Streiger, 15 May 2019 - 02:21 AM.


#9 TheGrinningThief

    Rookie

  • CS 2023 Participant
  • CS 2023 Participant
  • 1 posts

Posted 15 May 2019 - 07:04 AM

I play this game because I enjoy it. Because I'm waiting for MW5 to come out after all these years. And because I enjoy meeting new people every match and having fun with a cooperative team as a giant robot.

I've focused on CT kills in every Mechwarrior game since Mechwarrior 2. I don't know why that's such a big deal and causes so much whining, honestly. I've handled CT kills on Assaults in every iteration of the franchise in 'Mechs from Light to an equivalent Assault. Unless you're as heavy, you run the risk of dying a lot faster. Can't tell you how many times I've plinked a pesky light with a decent alpha strike because they got in the way. Can't tell you how many rear-CT cores I've done as an annoying light. The lore even advocates that appropriate light mech are supposed to do stuff like that against heavies and assaults.

I don't see why now that MWO is tied even in the least to the new Battletech PC game it suddenly means a shift in what IMHO is the optimal paradigm in targeting for the PC-based Mechwarrior games: CT targeting.

It's just like what you get taught in the military: get a body shot. Headshots are great, but really hard to pull off. Body shots mean you have a big target that's guaranteed to do some damage. Same philosophy here in my mind.

Plenty of people whine and moan on these forums because it isn't their true translation of Battletech to an FPS piloting game. As if the game has some unredeemable flaw or the devs just don't care. For every person whining on the forums I see a full drop deck of people that, warts and all, are just enjoying the game without being a priss.

The complainers can keep whining. Either play it as-is and go with the flow of developer involvement, or don't. Plain and simple.

Edit: Apparently after 6 years of lurking and playing I've actually posted on the forums for the first time. XD hooray!

Edited by TheGrinningThief, 15 May 2019 - 07:05 AM.


#10 MechaBattler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 5,119 posts

Posted 15 May 2019 - 12:58 PM

Everything in MWO feels samey. So I'm not playing much anymore. Map voting makes things boring. And a lot of mechs have become obsolete and PGI makes little effort to address the problem.

MW5 will get repetitive too. But the prospect of mods will create more variety. Like with HBS' Battletech, Roguetech revived my enthusiasm for the game, I got 100 more hours out of it.

#11 MeiSooHaityu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • Knight Errant
  • 10,912 posts
  • LocationMI

Posted 16 May 2019 - 02:48 AM

I don't mind if a game gets repetitive after a while and I end up taking a break or leaving it. I never expect games to hold my interest forever. If a game like MW5 gives me about 40 hours or more of enjoyment, heck I'd be pretty happy with that. HBS's BattleTech has given me over 300 hours of entertainment, and that is all vanilla (no mods). If MechWarrior 5 delivers close to that for me, that's just added bonus.

Maybe it is because I am an older gamer that didn't grow up with the live service mentality of always needing new content being poured into a game. In most of my life games were bought, played, and then put on the shelf to be occasionally played again in the future. It's just what I am used to.

Live Service games (like MWO) are fine and I have played my share of MWO. I am not knocking people's enjoyment of them, I'm just saying that I am used to games being more stand-alone experiences and used to them having a "shelf-life" so to speak.

So for me personally, I don't need MW5 to keep me playing for years straight like MWO. I just want a fun game that gives me a few dozen hours of enjoyment, and encourages me to revisit it from time to time (like firing up MechCommander or MechWarrior 2)...Oh and hopefully some expansions too... that would be nice. If it does that, I'll be perfectly content.

#12 Acersecomic

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 647 posts

Posted 16 May 2019 - 03:09 AM

View PostHenryFA, on 11 May 2019 - 06:17 PM, said:

Ask yourself a question?

Why are you still playing the game?

Because if the art style? Lore? Gameplay?

I like playing this game, because I like the idea of piloting my fav mech inside its cockpit
And I like games that require me to aim well for rewarding results(just like all shooter)


THIS! ^^

#13 Burning2nd

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 984 posts

Posted 16 May 2019 - 03:10 AM

View PostFlareUKCS, on 11 May 2019 - 06:09 PM, said:


Am I wrong ?


no you are not wrong... this is a lot of the grief that i have with this game..

it wasn't always like this.. when they did the front end change and then the weapons change.. thats when this happened

#14 Curccu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 4,610 posts

Posted 16 May 2019 - 03:16 AM

https://leaderboard....rch?u=FlareUKCS this amount of playing and making topic "why play MWO anymore" feels weird to me somewhat.
But clearly watching some "how to twist/damage spread" video would help.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users