95 replies to this topic

[VeritasSuperOmnia]

1) The core mechanics of armor and weapons (Battletech and older MW games) were based around having far less cover than is provided in game. This is the reason stupid things like lights and mediums owning heavier mechs in trades exists. Lots of cover = more opportunities to fire and duck behind something before a heavier mech can even rotate to see where it's been shot from. This also exacerbates poptarting (currently of the ATM and 3xERPPC variety). The excess of cover on most maps also is the core reason why NASCAR exists. Less cover would mean longer sight lines and and an element of real danger when trying to flank right non-stop i.e. NASCAR. This is also the reason why heavies like the Timberwolf are in such a bad place right now as Sean Lang referenced in his thread and video, as they have neither the agility to avoid incoming fire nor the armor to take the repeated hits from being a big slow moving target.

2) The lack of tactical objectives on the maps. Battletech and MW games in general are adaptations of real world battles. In battles you have specific weapons platforms for fulfilling specific objectives. In older iterations of the game, more tonnage your mech had, the more dangerous is was, but it could no longer fulfill some of the tactical requirements. Want to bring a Direwolf to this escort mission? Too bad, that hovertrain you're supposed to be pacing just gapped you and got blown up by enemy units because your mech wasn't fast enough to engage the enemy. This is no longer true as the lack of playing for objectives has made every MWO game into team deathmatch and as a result the only thing that matters is a mech's lethality. Why would you bring a Raven to the game for it's scouting and NARC capabilities, when you can drop in a Flea that is so fast and agile it can effectively survive more damage thrown its direction that an Annihilator? Why bring a Charger to the game when the need to cover large distances to rapidly redeploy assets in response to new scouting information is not something that happens in MWO? Just bring an assault that is fast enough not to get NASCAR'd on with the best hitboxes and pod space (cough MCMK2).

The problems with chassis and weapon balance will be much easier to sort out if these two things are addressed first. The only major tweek I see that would be needed is to increase the CD of LRMs to the point where they are long range fire support systems again rather than DPS systems. I think you'll find that everything else will fall into place nicely. I implore PGI to set aside development time for new/reworked maps and implementing game modes that incorporate tactical objectives. You will breathe new life into the game if you do this.

[Heavy Money]

1) This is a good thing, and is part of what makes the game good. On the tabletop, different sizes of mechs are balanced by cost. For a deathmatch game, we want different chassis to be able to compete with each other if played properly to their roles. Differences in agility and mobility, and the different tactical opportunities caused by these differences, make that possible.

Poptarting is a bit silly, but its only really overpowered on the Vapor Eagle because it can run a Heavy's worth of firepower. That's a vapor eagle problem, not a poptarting problem.

NASCAR is common even on open maps like Polar Highlands. Its cause is not as simple as there being cover. Having more open maps wouldn't necessarily hurt the game, but it would skew things more in favor of long range builds (which are doing fine already) and would not solve Nascar.

2) More tactical objectives would be fun. Not having more is a missed opportunity, but adding them would be an inherent change away from the game being a deathmatch.

If you think LRMs are a problem, your mental model of the game is wildly inaccurate. LRMs see less and less use the higher tier of play you're at.

Edited by Heavy Money, 14 February 2021 - 07:17 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

You do realize that, without the cover, the big 'Mechs just get rained into oblivion by LRMs, right? You've played Polar Highlands, right?

[ScrapIron Prime]

VeritasSuperOmnia, on 14 February 2021 - 06:24 PM, said:

1) The core mechanics of armor and weapons (Battletech and older MW games) were based around having far less cover than is provided in game. This is the reason stupid things like lights and mediums owning heavier mechs in trades exists.

Battletech and MW games in general are adaptations of real world battles.

I am left wondering if you’ve ever played the board game from which all of this is derived. There was less cover in the board game because you didn’t NEED it. Everything was a modifier to hit... your movement, their movement, terrain... and the ranges of the weapons determined the base hit numbers. This is why the biggest guns have the shortest ranges, and why minimum ranges exist. it’s game balance from the board game, ingrained into lore.

When the board game made its transition into first person shooter, there was no cover because computers couldn’t HANDLE it. Now they can. And while smoke and foliage can obscure sight, hard cover is required to protect yourself, because short of causing the target reticle to shake, there’s no way to throw off aim. (And that would just be too annoying.). MWO adjusted for this by doubling structure and armor values over the board game while weapon damages remained roughly the same.

Light mechs have always been able to challenge heavier mechs. Speed kills... your opponent. Originally it was movement modifiers and the versatility of options. Now it’s mostly the latter, as lights can take their pick of terrain and attack angles.

All it takes to break the NASCAR mindset is one player saying “turn and fight here and we win”. If that player knows what they’re doing and a few others listen, NASCAR is over. (Check out a few of the veteran streamers to see this in action.). It exists not because it is a limit of the game, but because it is the limit of teamwork when no one is communicating. Try playing a tank game or a warship game and you’ll see NASCAR in effect there too. It’s the players, not the game, not the presence or absence of cover.

As for the addition of tactical objectives... maybe. Depends on how it’s handled. Mechwarrior 5, for example, is a great exercise in “surprise objectives” with pop-up enemies and waves of foes and... and it’s not great Battletech. (I won’t say unkind things about said game, but not because there aren’t unkind things I could say.). If done right, tactical objectives could add to MWO, but if done wrong you’ll just annoy people by adding objectives mid match that they are in no position to accomplish.

[LordNothing]

if i were to name 2 reasons why the game is bad, id have to peg the poor map design and lack of proper maintenance of the game itself (like chosing an engine with no upgrade path or not keeping full time programmers on staff).

[Khobai]

lack of proper role warfare is the biggest problem for me

[Vyx]

Main reason for me: It's never been but 1/10th what it could have been.

"Minimally viable product"

[General Solo]

imo the game is bad because of a lack of polish or functionality in some key areas
like match making, crashes due to unhandled exceptions, low server tick rate or/and untuned HSR for bad hitreg on some connections, even invisible walls need a fix in a thinking mans shooter
The base game is good, let down by some flaws

Which drags the rest of the game down
Flaws that new content can not longer cover for

Take all that LRM OP, NASCAR OP etc stuff, nuthing good match making could not fix.
Doh I dont think a match maker was ever made that could handle a merged que.

PGI are fixing the low hanging fruit, but numbers won't improve until some of the more impactfull flaws are fixed first

Like merge que
To PGI I suggest make a solo que and group que event to gauge interest (Simultaneously)
Edit: Advertise it two weeks ahead
ie: Make a matchmaker for a group queue, maybe use a round robin system to spread the pain of top groups, so the same people don't always play them and
use Jay Z MM for solo queue,
then activate them for an event
Monitor/See how it goes

Better than changing the game totally
Solution of least impact/cost but perhaps most benefit

My thoughts
C3PO can you translate

Edit: Some Edits

Edited by General Solo, 15 February 2021 - 12:56 AM.

[Lousyten]

Please live up to your username.

[General Solo]

Please explain
Other wise that is hardly positive or constructive
I only changed my username in response to the current climate
being a general is hard work for a retired filthy casual I'd rather be a Homer.

Edit: But theirs no one else being a general for the soles so I am doing it, believe me if some one else was doing it I would let them do it, but their no one, so Im doing it
(Could be others but I play less so don't see them)

But something is wrong in MWO Town and I can not be silent

In other words what is your point
Or are you being obtuse

Joining a group is not an option for me
I am an older guy , as are many here, that's a major demographic for BT and MW in general.
I am blessed being a talented filthy casual relatively, not all old guys are, they need a place too.

I don't wanna hang with some 20, 30 or even 4o year olds climbing the lobster hierarchy ladder
I can hang at the top doh sheet hit reg makes me frustrated

And worse match maker and merge que drains the game of players which makes me angry the most
If you have a valid argument lets argue otherwise I suggest you keep that to your self

Again whats your point

Im a fighter, lets fight your point
If its better I concede
If its worse I will continue fighting it
Forum warrior style, within the COC

Sometimes when you can't get whats right you have to show others, what it feels like to be deprived of whats right.

Other wise they ignore you, they don't pay attention.
Cause they had it too good too long without thinking of the big picture.

Edited by General Solo, 15 February 2021 - 02:11 AM.

[General Solo]

An other thing is some premade memebers may think I hate premades and I must say nuthing is further from the truth
I luv premdes too
My mentors were the best premades

I just don't like them in solo que with the big skill gap going because with my 300 IQ I can tell its not the best thing for the game

Sure in solo/soup que I call you premad
But in group type queues I call you battle Brother, or respected opponent
You have those that fight for you, your unit / group battle bothers

I fight for the solo players as you can not stat shame me as I have done some stuff that prevents that
Until its set right I will continue to fight
For the sake of the games longevity

Even if I ruffle a few feathers

Love always

PITA Scrubby Hive underlord OZHomerOZ aka General Solo

Edited by General Solo, 15 February 2021 - 01:58 AM.

[Lousyten]

General Solo, on 15 February 2021 - 01:31 AM, said:

Please explain

I was referring to OP's username. Sorry if I caused some misunderstanding.

[General Solo]

NP
Gonna have to google it now
I may learn something, despite freeze brain pain ... haha

[Vellron2005]

First of all, I would not call this game "BAD" per-se...

I would, however, say that it is a grand waste of potential.

The MAIN problem of this game is it's base design - it is entirely focused on short, quick PVP battles, instead of being focused on an active, player-evolving story, lore-rich gameplay, and coop play.

The PVP aspect should have been just a fraction of the total game, with Faction play being the main game, the "meat" of the game..

Alas, it was not to be.

In terms of the game we did get - there are many missed opportunities. The biggest blunder in my opinion is definitely the bolt-ons. Most of them make the mech look comical, caricature-like, or downright ugly. They should have changed the base geometry of the mech, which would have added a cool look to it, not add a jet engine or a strapped-on car..

Lastly, an honorable mention of why this game is a missed opportunity should go to the chronic repetitiveness of it's design. Most if not all mechs of a particular weight class feel the same, can mount similar or even identical builds, and can be played the same. And when you play them, you play them mostly on several over-played maps where every inch of the map is well-known, and exploited. Lack of map variety is the absolute worst thing about this game. It's always "yaay, new mech, can't wait to nascar it around HPG for the 100th time!"

If the devs wanted to improve this game, they would either make 20+ new maps from existing assets, or they would make a random procedural map generator that would spew a random map every time you drop.

That would skyrocket the replay value of this game.

Without it..

Well.. just look at the population..

[LordNothing]

Miss Greene, on 14 February 2021 - 07:31 PM, said:

You do realize that, without the cover, the big 'Mechs just get rained into oblivion by LRMs, right? You've played Polar Highlands, right?

i think thats more a problem with the electronic warfare design. look how lerms work in living legends. you need c3 mechs to get the data that this game just gives you for free. if im up scouting and you are in the back, and there is not a c3 mech there between us, i can not give you a lock.

you have another problem where everyone is running passive so you absolutely need to have active radar to use those missiles as anything other than direct fire drumfire rockets. and since you are the only one on your side on the enemy's radar, guess who is getting the enemy lerms? so you go passive and you are useless, well not so fast.

difference 3 would be that if you want to use lerms as they are used in mwo, you need to really be putting in a team effort, 3 or 4 other players have to be doing something just so you can fire, but that doesnt kill lerms, because tag and narc are significantly more than a minor buff to lock time. they are like missile beacons that bring in all untargeted missiles flying close to them. even if you were on the front line, and you had to punch out, you could be using your battle armor tag to keep the rain on. it shows big picture thinking.

now you got scouts, scouting, and getting tons of points because your lerms are hitting their targets, and you get tons of points for hitting them, even the c3 mechs are making cbills. and the team doesnt hate you for bringing lerms because they are all getting paid and they have map control which helps win. so it all works, role warfare exists, engagements are forced into closer proximity, and there is always something to do.

with the right kind of mechanical depth, that pgi neglected, they could have used more natural map design, which is easier to make. just pipe your fractal map generator of choice into your map editor. sprinkle on foliage, buildings, etc. effectively maps are the way they are because the lerm mechanic dictated how they should be. this also kind of applies to arty/air strikes too for why we have few tunnel networks and no deep water areas. or how the choice of single life play seriously killed the development of modes (which fp had the potential to bring back if the denizens of same could tolerate some change).

Edited by LordNothing, 15 February 2021 - 06:21 AM.

[w0qj]

Why is this game bad? It's the players
Online games come and go, if you don't like a particular online game, there are lots of other choices to occupy your lockdown time...

But seriously, what comes across as not-so-good (aka 'bad' for others) and may even have good/redeeming qualities:

~MWO is a very 'flat' online game; you can play everything in MWO for free (you can even save up MC from the regular events towards your favorite Hero mech). You literally don't have to pay a cent to play all of MWO, but you will need lots of time to grind for it. (Hence I myself paid up, to make up for the lost time as a MWO late-comer).

~Hero/Special mechs are at its most affordable ever, with Hero/Special mech sales once in a while.
~All Standard variants including the Standard Variant of the MW5 Reinforcement mechs are now available for virtual CBills.

What more can you ask for?

[The pessimistic optimist]

LordNothing, on 15 February 2021 - 06:13 AM, said:

i think thats more a problem with the electronic warfare design. look how lerms work in living legends. you need c3 mechs to get the data that this game just gives you for free. if im up scouting and you are in the back, and there is not a c3 mech there between us, i can not give you a lock.

you have another problem where everyone is running passive so you absolutely need to have active radar to use those missiles as anything other than direct fire drumfire rockets. and since you are the only one on your side on the enemy's radar, guess who is getting the enemy lerms? so you go passive and you are useless, well not so fast.

difference 3 would be that if you want to use lerms as they are used in mwo, you need to really be putting in a team effort, 3 or 4 other players have to be doing something just so you can fire, but that doesnt kill lerms, because tag and narc are significantly more than a minor buff to lock time. they are like missile beacons that bring in all untargeted missiles flying close to them. even if you were on the front line, and you had to punch out, you could be using your battle armor tag to keep the rain on. it shows big picture thinking.

now you got scouts, scouting, and getting tons of points because your lerms are hitting their targets, and you get tons of points for hitting them, even the c3 mechs are making cbills. and the team doesnt hate you for bringing lerms because they are all getting paid and they have map control which helps win. so it all works, role warfare exists, engagements are forced into closer proximity, and there is always something to do.

with the right kind of mechanical depth, that pgi neglected, they could have used more natural map design, which is easier to make. just pipe your fractal map generator of choice into your map editor. sprinkle on foliage, buildings, etc. effectively maps are the way they are because the lerm mechanic dictated how they should be. this also kind of applies to arty/air strikes too for why we have few tunnel networks and no deep water areas. or how the choice of single life play seriously killed the development of modes (which fp had the potential to bring back if the denizens of same could tolerate some change).

I like to see the idea of weak locks vs medium locks vs strong locks. How strong the lock will determines how accurate the missiles are. . If you have a weak lock a lot missiles will be missing some will hit a lot will miss medium lock more will hit the target and strong lock they all hit the target. Just idea for making it little more team work based. Hell make it so if you even have line of sight if you don't have tag on the target it will be a medium lock. I like to see them change the way people get locks

Edited by SirSmokes, 15 February 2021 - 06:55 AM.

[VonBruinwald]

SirSmokes, on 15 February 2021 - 06:46 AM, said:

I like to see the idea of weak locks vs medium locks vs strong locks. How strong the lock will determines how accurate the missiles are. . If you have a weak lock a lot missiles will be missing some will hit a lot will miss medium lock more will hit the target and strong lock they all hit the target. Just idea for making it little more team work based. Hell make it so if you even have line of sight if you don't have tag on the target it will be a medium lock. I like to see them change the way people get locks

Can we remove targeting squares from the HUD (minimap/compass only) and remove convergence for torso mounted weapons while we're at it please?

[The pessimistic optimist]

VonBruinwald, on 15 February 2021 - 07:10 AM, said:

Can we remove targeting squares from the HUD (minimap/compass only) and remove convergence for torso mounted weapons while we're at it please?

What's your thinking behind that idea?

Edited by SirSmokes, 15 February 2021 - 07:19 AM.

[Saved By The Bell]

Enemies killed me = Game is bad.