91 replies to this topic

[ThreeStooges]

I like my raven out ranging a stalker. Now if I didn't have to make a laser on wooden stilts to do so that would be nice but that 1900m laser doesn't really need to move that much.

[cazeral]

ECM needs a simple but effective rework. Instead of making time to lock x times the number of stacked ECM units as a penalty, it should be an increase in range but only plus 0.5, 0.25, 0.175 range per additional ECM mech. With the current time stacking effect, you can literally hold target waiting for a lock (with all Skills Tree bonuses & BAP) for 25 seconds plus without securing it or if a couple of lights run in with ECM, they become invulnerable to lock with the instant break if they move from the centre of the lock target even if you have full Skill Tree decay nodes, again because of the stacking effect.

ECM mechs used to be few and far between and often took a coordinated drop to make them effective, now, they are plastered all over the drops and that is what has thrown them out of balance.

[Vonbach]

Anything over a certain distance should need a lock on just like a LRM

[martian]

cazeral, on 11 November 2023 - 06:52 AM, said:

...
ECM mechs used to be few and far between and often took a coordinated drop to make them effective, now, they are plastered all over the drops and that is what has thrown them out of balance.

Not quite. In the beginnings of MWO, ECM was even better than it is now, since it covered much larger area. Thus, even if the number of ECM-capable 'chassis (to choose from) was lower, one in-game deployed ECM 'Mech protected more friendly units.

[pbiggz]

Vonbach, on 11 November 2023 - 12:55 PM, said:

Anything over a certain distance should need a lock on just like a LRM

That is silly.

[Tepmnthar]

I have many alts in low tiers. No hags, no jump ppcs, people move in line, and very simple to anticipate your opponents' position. Playing totally brain busted builds can still have fun in those tiers.
Just create alts and provent from matching with top players in meta builds.

[foamyesque]

pbiggz, on 12 November 2023 - 02:26 PM, said:

That is silly.

Fair.

Better idea: Make you have to manually adjust your weapon convergences for distance instead of having it all done automatically and instantly for you. Really make the skill more relevant :v

[cazeral]

martian, on 11 November 2023 - 09:22 PM, said:

Not quite. In the beginnings of MWO, ECM was even better than it is now, since it covered much larger area. Thus, even if the number of ECM-capable 'chassis (to choose from) was lower, one in-game deployed ECM 'Mech protected more friendly units.

So explain then, how you now see 4 or more ECM capable mechs on each side of a QP drop. So, absolutely right and the range wasn't that big in comparison to the reduced one now. Issue still remains, stacked ECM shouldn't be working the way it is.

[pbiggz]

foamyesque, on 13 November 2023 - 12:26 AM, said:

Fair.

Better idea: Make you have to manually adjust your weapon convergences for distance instead of having it all done automatically and instantly for you. Really make the skill more relevant :v

That would *feel* aweful. Experiments in convergence have been done, if shots dont go where you expect it just doesnt feel good. Gunplay is critically important in any FPS. Its kind of why a game like destiny has staying power even though everything else about it is falling apart; monetization might be a dumpster fire, but going into a nightfall with your favourite guns *still feels good*. Or at least it did when i played it (that was long long ago).

I think what the game has needed since the beginning is fewer guns with longer cooldowns and more splashy feedback, and more equipment to **** with those guns. As discussed in other threads, one way to break the dominance of ballistic and energy weapons would be introducing reactive AND reflective armor (we would need both for this to work or everyone would just move to ballistic OR energy). A piece of non-weapon equipment designed specifically to defeat, at least partially, incoming damage from direct fire weapons would put those weapons on a similar standing with lock on missiles, which have no less than 3 distinct countermeasures already in game. This would indirectly buff lock on weapons because the opportunity cost of running them would no longer be so high, and maybe, just maybe, the opportunity cost of not running a mixed build would be high enough to justify more of them.

Consider, a full blue laser build runs up against reactive armor? EZ clap. Reflective armor? ****, you have no recourse, your weapons are nerfed enough against that to be next to useless.

Now consider that scenario with blue laser and gauss. Reflective armor? You can use the gauss but a good chunk of your alpha is gone. Reactive armor? Same deal, at least you have some weapons that can work, but a good chunk of your alpha gets nerfed out because someone ran a countermeasure.

Now what if someone ran some weird wacky ballistic/energy build WITH missiles as a back up? And then you ran into reactive or reflective armor? At least in theory, that would mean only a third of your alpha would be directly countered. They could run AMS or ECM too, hell, thats probably likely, but then what you've done, is taken a bunch of tonnage that would have gone towards THEIR weapons, and forced them to spend it on equipment instead, thus also lowering average alphas across the board.

[LordNothing]

not really a big fan of free unrealistic precision. but can you imagine having to tweak your rangefinder each time you fire. i think id have fixed convergence with torso weapons, and automatic convergence with arm hardpoints (given the correct actuators) but with actuation delay, just like a real fire control system. of course hsr broke that capability.

Edited by LordNothing, 13 November 2023 - 11:29 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

pbiggz, on 13 November 2023 - 07:27 AM, said:

Consider, a full blue laser build runs up against reactive armor? EZ clap. Reflective armor? ****, you have no recourse, your weapons are nerfed enough against that to be next to useless.

Honestly I don't think this really helps the game, it is just a bandaid that furthers the rock-paper-scissors nature of the weapon types. IMO the weapon types created a false dichotomy, in TT they are used somewhat for a very basic damage type system not unlike Destiny where it is very basic, however the problem is that weapon types are far from equal in both games, where energy weapons are mainstays for most good builds while ballistics are typically better for heavy/assault mechs. Even in MW4, reflective/reactive didn't stop large laser spam, it just increased your longevity against large laser spam while you used large laser spam as well.

The goal of the different kinds of weapons in this game should be somewhat similar to what Borderlands tried to accomplish, make weapons feel more unique. RACs have spin, LBX have spread, UACs are burst fire, ACs are single shot, etc, etc. Make the game more interesting with different firing behaviors. Who honestly cares about ballistics vs energy.

[pbiggz]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 13 November 2023 - 12:42 PM, said:

Honestly I don't think this really helps the game, it is just a bandaid that furthers the rock-paper-scissors nature of the weapon types. IMO the weapon types created a false dichotomy, in TT they are used somewhat for a very basic damage type system not unlike Destiny where it is very basic, however the problem is that weapon types are far from equal in both games, where energy weapons are mainstays for most good builds while ballistics are typically better for heavy/assault mechs. Even in MW4, reflective/reactive didn't stop large laser spam, it just increased your longevity against large laser spam while you used large laser spam as well.

I dont think any of the countermeasures should really completely halt a strategy, i think they should be strong enough to provide some kind of counterplay so that you cant simply run roughshod with them.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 13 November 2023 - 12:42 PM, said:

The goal of the different kinds of weapons in this game should be somewhat similar to what Borderlands tried to accomplish, make weapons feel more unique. RACs have spin, LBX have spread, UACs are burst fire, ACs are single shot, etc, etc. Make the game more interesting with different firing behaviors. Who honestly cares about ballistics vs energy.

You're talking about some stuff that is pretty fundamental to battletech. Its always been a big mechs with lots of guns setting, even if big mech with a few BIG guns would serve it better.

So in short, you are absolutely right, and there's probably nothing we can do about it because I dont think we're ever going to get hardpoint deflation, and if we do, there are too many weapons that become redundant or useless.

[Weeny Machine]

epikt, on 11 November 2023 - 06:16 AM, said:

Oh, you know, I was just pointing the hypocrisy of by one hand bragging about being a filthy sniper and by the other hand complaining about "sniper meta".

As for being wrong, she is on at least 2 points:
- "snipers dominate": this is simply false. Snipers are viable, they are strong at the condition their team don't yolo out of their overwatch but they can be countered ; and they are not the dominating playstyle as most engagements happen at mid range (~500m)
- "long range is bad for the game" : I would elaborate, but it's been half of my posts last 2 days and I'm tired - tl;dr: mid/long range makes for more interesting and tactical combat.

We must play different games then. If the maps allow it (and most do), assaults sit as far as possible from the enemy. And you cannot get them out of overwatch easily anymore because HAGs can also shred lights at close range. In canyon most teams sit in D line and fire and some even in E5.
Also, the weaponry consists of HAGs and some backup weapons - if possible also long range, PPCs, ERLL boats etc.

Yeah, but sniping and long range doesn't dominate...right? Because people in online pvp games never choose the most "overpowered" builds...also right?

Seriously, if you believe that then...nope, I am better quiet at that point.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

pbiggz, on 13 November 2023 - 01:17 PM, said:

You're talking about some stuff that is pretty fundamental to battletech. Its always been a big mechs with lots of guns setting, even if big mech with a few BIG guns would serve it better.

So in short, you are absolutely right, and there's probably nothing we can do about it because I dont think we're ever going to get hardpoint deflation, and if we do, there are too many weapons that become redundant or useless.

Oh I know, but honestly if Mechwarrior hopes to actually be a better designed game, it sort of has to separate itself from some of the "fundamental" mechanics of Battletech or at least TT. MW4 had started to go that way and not without good reason. IMO MW4 should be the starting point/template for MWO2 because while it may not have been as balanced it had made some smart choices to slowly decouple itself from some of the goofy rules of TT.

[VeeOt Dragon]

honestly i wouldn't mind seeing Reactive/reflective armor. you wouldn't even have to make it cost tonnage just slide it into the "Armor" tab. this would make you have to make that choice of if you want some extra tonnage at the cost of crit slots (FF, LFF, or hell stealth) or chose to take less damage from energy or ballistic weapons. this would even if you make the new armor types not cost anything in the way of tonnage or slots (though of course put a C-bill cost on it) help to curb some of the over bloated alphas as many require LFF or FF to work.

mind you we also have to remember that MWO probably has the steepest learning curve of any PvP game i have ever played (mind you i don't really play many pvp games to begin with and MWO is the only one i play anymore, used to play For Honor since i could play it on console but it got boring). adding more armor types would just increase the complexity. don't get me wrong i don't think the game should be dumbed down but i also think that any addition or changes should consider the "New Player Experience" first and foremost. we need to stop looking at balancing the game for the so called "Elite T1s" and look to the more common lower tier players (keeping in mind that T1 alts tend to shift numbers a but out of wack these days). of course we also need PGI to look into drawing more new players to the game if they want to actual make money *** it is the new players that are more likely to buy things like MC and Mech Bays or even the odd Mech Pack..

also we need to stick as close to the roots of what Mechwarrior is as we can. if you don't have those elements it might as well not be Mechwarior/Battletech at all. just call it "generic mech shooter #10"

Edited by VeeOt Dragon, 13 November 2023 - 04:27 PM.

[foamyesque]

pbiggz, on 13 November 2023 - 07:27 AM, said:

That would *feel* aweful. Experiments in convergence have been done, if shots dont go where you expect it just doesnt feel good.

Skill issue, learn to shoot, etc.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

VeeOt Dragon, on 13 November 2023 - 04:25 PM, said:

also we need to stick as close to the roots of what Mechwarrior is as we can. if you don't have those elements it might as well not be Mechwarior/Battletech at all. just call it "generic mech shooter #10"

What is the "roots" of Mechwarrior exactly, what separates it from other generic mech shooters outside the IP?

I'm not saying it isn't different I'm just legit curious what people think the answer is because I would be willing to be you would get different answers depending on who you asked meaning there isn't really a "right" answer to that question. That said, we are far from making this game become like Mech Arena or the more "gundam" feel that Armored Core and Gundam games have.

[Vonbach]

pbiggz, on 12 November 2023 - 02:26 PM, said:

That is silly.

Poor baby snipers might not be able to sit all the way on the other side of the map farming damage.

[feeWAIVER]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 13 November 2023 - 05:43 PM, said:

What is the "roots" of Mechwarrior exactly, what separates it from other generic mech shooters outside the IP?

I'm not saying it isn't different I'm just legit curious what people think the answer is because I would be willing to be you would get different answers depending on who you asked meaning there isn't really a "right" answer to that question. That said, we are far from making this game become like Mech Arena or the more "gundam" feel that Armored Core and Gundam games have.

multiple hit boxes, speed of combat,and ttk.

[Curccu]

foamyesque, on 13 November 2023 - 12:26 AM, said:

Fair.

Better idea: Make you have to manually adjust your weapon convergences for distance instead of having it all done automatically and instantly for you. Really make the skill more relevant :v

I think some of the delta warriors had that, quite fun in that setting IMO that would probably just increase skillcap in this game massively. Laser users would suffer but ballistics convergence could actually be better when you dial range correctly and lead shots.