558 replies to this topic

[Trogusaur]

Victor Morson, on 12 April 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

No, they're not. This argument again. Sigh.. once more into the breach!

• Legs move, CT doesn't.
  
• Legs can be protected by waist high cover while returning fire, CT can't.
  
• Destroying one leg doesn't kill the 'mech, destroying the CT does.
  
• Legs have more armor than the rear torso, which can kill a 'mech fast, rendering the "any angle" argument moot.

We meet this argument with equal irritation. Again, I will restate that there are two legs, and any player intending on a leg party will outfit with weapons appropriate for a two-shot A-strikes. Even while moving, legs are obvious targets because the combined hitbox is still 5x the size of any torso, even the CT.

Using hill cover to shield them only goes as far as the hill itself goes, meaning you are ripe for an ambush. It's a nice thought for a defense tactic... all the way up until you take an AC-20 to the face.

Quote

An estimated 9 out of 10 people I've encountered that think legging is cheap prefer to stop their 'mech or reduced speed to 10% and then just stand and slug it out. If you want to keep your legs, don't give me an opening to hack them off.

If you get legged all the time, you're a bad pilot. Also if you can't hit a CT at long range, good luck hitting a target that's moving on an already moving target.

Please, don't attempt to factor in skill into this argument. Ego aside, I consider myself a better-than-average pilot, fully capable of CT coring from any range. I am not stupid enough to stop to shoot, with knowledge my opponent is a legger. It is just as easy to hit any torso at range as it is to hit a leg. Note how I never said I am legged all the time, most players have more class than to do that. I just have a problem with such an exploited tactic.

Quote

Destroying one leg doesn't kill the 'mech, destroying the CT does.

Have you played MW3? Legging defined the metagame because legging did insta-kill enemies. MW4's "magic legs" slightly fixed the problem by limiting mobility after being legged. However, that also meant you were one ERPPC away from losing the leg and dying anyway.

The fact that so many people complain about legging should be a great indicator that something is wrong. 'Nuff said.

Edited by Lord Trogus, 12 April 2012 - 11:11 AM.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

No you're right,Victor. Legs are by all means a viable target and they are heavily armored for a reason. The underlining issue behind why some pilots utterly loath legging is due to the individual game mechanics behind what happens when you are legged. For instance in MW3, losing a leg results in instant death (well damage to the point where the internals where gone, too). Grouped along with legs being incredibly easy targets, lack of covering terrain (flat rollings hills are not adequate coverage), perfect aim weapons (with a hovering mouse cross hair = bs good aim), and of course lack of robust internals.

Its one thing to disable a leg through damage, but to completely dismember a leg (a la MW2) should require a tremendous amount of firepower. Think about it in another way, how hard is to break a bone, compared to losing a limb entirely! What I believe should happen is, (similar to MW2:Mercs) once the armor of a leg is gone and internals/myomers starts taking damage, the leg is disabled and equipment criticals used there (heat sinks, jjs, etc.) are also damage/destroyed. At this point the leg is nonfunctional and the 'mech limps around at a reduced speed (like MW4, yeah I know 'mechs didn't limp around in canon....). Now, to completely destroy a leg to the point where the leg is no longer attached to the 'mech should take an incredible amount of damage, by comparison. This isn't just a large chunk of metal welded on to the CT/Hip, There is A LOT of "crap" holding all that metal on there. At this point, your weaponry is pretty much cutting off chunks of metal until the limb is severed. Should your leg take the amount of damage needed to remove it completely, then the 'mech falls over (MW2:Mercs style) and take additional damage upon impact to the ground.

Should this also happen to both legs? Well then one can argue that would warrant a kill considering that 1) you put a ridiculous amount of damage into the a large chunk of the 'mech that supports everything and 2) If you're aiming for both legs instead of just doing a tactical legging and taking out a less mobile CT, that the pilot on the receiving end did not have much armor on the legs, at all. Hopefully, what would happen is that legging can be used to drastically slow down a 'mech for a tactical advantage by removing the speed of the other 'mech, then getting a kill through destroying the CT (or an easier RT kill if the other guy is moving slow enough) but not endorse the "old" style of legging where the fastest way to kill a 'mech is simply by blasting away at one of the legs on a 'mech.

[Trogusaur]

This. IMO Legging would be alright, as long as it is not grounds for an insta-kill. You misunderstand, Victor. I don't have a problem with just legging, I have a problem with any exploited tactic that serves as an "I Win" button. Hence, why so many people whine about common MW4 tactics such as poptarting and alpha-striking. (Ironically, all three are generally used at the same time!)

Edited by Lord Trogus, 12 April 2012 - 11:17 AM.

[iRevive]

whatever it takes to win. end of story.

[Victor Morson]

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 11:14 AM, said:

This. IMO Legging would be alright, as long as it is not grounds for an insta-kill. You misunderstand, Victor. I don't have a problem with just legging, I have a problem with any exploited tactic that serves as an "I Win" button. Hence, why so many people whine about common MW4 tactics such as poptarting and alpha-striking. (Ironically, all three are generally used at the same time!)

Legging has never been an I Win button in any of the games, except perhaps MW3 due to a number of really bad factors and MW1 where if you rammed your tiny Locust into an AI's legs it wouldn't know how to shoot you or back away, but I think that's going abit off topic.

Pop tarting and alpha strikes are 100% valid strategies and people need to learn to cope with it instead of complaining about it. Again I'm in an odd category where I'm very, very happy coolant was removed because it makes alpha strikes have to be far more reserved for absolutely necessary shots with energy builds.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

We meet this argument with equal irritation. Again, I will restate that there are two legs, and any player intending on a leg party will outfit with weapons appropriate for a two-shot A-strikes. Even while moving, legs are obvious targets because the combined hitbox is still 5x the size of any torso, even the CT.

No, they aren't. I'd like to know where you're getting this 5x argument from - even an Atlas, which has one of the largest hit areas for legs of any 'mech (and also the slowest moving) takes up the same hitbox, roughly, as a side torso per leg. Second, the legs are moving if you're actually bothering to pilot - in particular at angles - making a lot of weapons (in particular those with travel times) wind up zipping between the legs very often - or at best, splashing the wrong leg, which doesn't help you much.

Your own point about there being TWO legs, each with more armor than side torsos (if you're smart and don't strip their armor, anyway) is an issue as well. That means your legs combined have more armor than your CT by a good margin.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

Using hill cover to shield them only goes as far as the hill itself goes, meaning you are ripe for an ambush. It's a nice thought for a defense tactic... all the way up until you take an AC-20 to the face.

No, it doesn't. It depends on the terrain. If you are exposing your upper body to shoot in a ravine or slope, you can offer a lot of leg protection, in particular at long range. You don't need to go sticking your 'mech's whole outline out there all the time.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

Please, don't attempt to factor in skill into this argument. Ego aside, I consider myself a better-than-average pilot, fully capable of CT coring from any range. I am not stupid enough to stop to shoot, with knowledge my opponent is a legger. It is just as easy to hit any torso at range as it is to hit a leg. Note how I never said I am legged all the time, most players have more class than to do that. I just have a problem with such an exploited tactic.

It's not an exploited tactic. I tend to go for legs if:

A: The 'mech has huge legs (such as an Atlas) and
B: The 'mech isn't moving very fast or
C: Has taken pre-existing leg damage, making it the weak spot.

It is not as easy to hit the legs of a decent pilot and very rough on some 'mechs (are you seriously saying that it's as easy to hit a Raven's legs going full bore at long range, and that it is the same difficulty required to nail it's side torso? Really?) .. if you have a damage-over-time weapon like a beam laser (provided they do them like that) you're never, ever going to sink 100% of your beam's damage into a moving leg, but you will be able to do it on torsos.

Now in MWO you have to factor in things like critical hits, ammo explosions and such we haven't seen for a long time in the franchise giving even more reason to go for side torsos.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

Have you played MW3? Legging defined the metagame because legging did insta-kill enemies. MW4's "magic legs" slightly fixed the problem by limiting mobility after being legged. However, that also meant you were one ERPPC away from losing the leg and dying anyway.

MW3 had more balance problems than just legging - it's free aiming system and mech customization literally turned multiplayer into a light gun game of "point, click, they die." If you're using MW3 as your basis for how hard it is to hit legs, I see where you are going wrong.

I'm in favor of MW4's system (followed by a CBT accurate lean-and-shoot system) for legged targets, but that's mostly to help people not get as frustrated.. also I have a lot of fun limping around a battlefield in a beat to hell ride, so I think it's far more entertaining in general. NOT because it's otherwise cheap otherwise. It's never been cheap.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

The fact that so many people complain about legging should be a great indicator that something is wrong. 'Nuff said.

No, it's not. Since the dawn of games people have cried about anything they think is cheap; things they don't want to learn to counter and rather just complain about or things that are frustrating to the person on the receiving end (getting legged and getting thrown on your back indefinitely, being forced to kill yourself if you're left to rot in MWLL for example), but aren't actually cheap.

Legging is not cheap, and never has been (again, excluding MW1 where the AI was as dumb as a brick) - it's been a fair game target throughout the franchise. If you are a good pilot and protect your legs with lots of angled movement, speed variations and cover you'll be fine. Generally speaking if you have two undamaged 'mechs of similar styles and they clash with one going for the leg and one going for the torso, the one going for the leg will be dead nearly every time.

I've had a LOT of experience on both ends of legging and have zero qualms doing it when it has an advantage but at the same time I don't do it all the time because it's usually the far worse option. This even gets to be a bigger issue when dealing with 'mechs shorter than yours, as up close, hitting the legs becomes even more problematic. Aiming for center mass or the back is and always has been the way to go, with a handful of exceptions (blowing off a limb with a huge easily hit gun in it for example, like the Hollander II in MWLL).

Long story short, just because people cry about something doesn't mean it's broken. It means they can't deal with it. There's a huge crowd of people who play fighting games while crying "No X character no Y character no supers no ultras it's all unfair!" too, but they're flat out wrong.

Edited by Victor Morson, 12 April 2012 - 01:58 PM.

[Zylo]

I view legging like blowing off a track in WoT. Valid tactic that people hate because it leaves them a stationary target (although with jumpjets some movement should still be possible).

I don't think in single life matches legging a mech and leaving it there will be as valid a tactic since the legged mech's team can just stay near the legged mech while it continues to fire. Some maps may make this a more valid tactic than others if there is enough cover to hide from the legged mech.

As long as the hit box for each leg is sized to match the leg it will make it much harder to leg a mech vs the MW2 days with the way too large hit boxes for legs. Also something to consider, if additional c-bills are awarded for damage done you can bet a team will be firing on a stationary legged mech since it would be a very easy target (for WoT players you know how fast teams all fire on a tracked tank trying for the kill). I don't think the old MW2 legging and leaving will be an issue here.

[Trogusaur]

I fail to understand how people get "invalid tactic" when I am saying "broken tactic". I agree 100% that legging, alpha striking, and poptarting are valid, they are within the game's parameters. However, call me a "traditionalist", but all of them are ridiculous in my book. The initial premise of Battletech and Mechwarrior was that you are in a walking tank, shooting each other with the most advanced weapons known to what writers could think of. This includes energy weapons, ballistics and missles. Now (as of MW4), this dream has been reduced to jumping PPC raves in the largest 'mech possible. This is NOT how TT or the books described 31st century combat, and it is a complete departure from what the original series stood for. LRMs and short range weapons have become completely obsolete because of tactics like jump sniping and boating.

Don't get me wrong, the game allowed it, so there is no reason why leggers and poptarts can't leg and tart, as long as the other players at least have a place to play the "original way". However, that certainly does not mean I want to see it in future games. MW:O is adhering as close to TT as possible, and from what I understand, jumpsniping was not powerful enough to exploit, and legging was balanced.

Victor Morson, on 12 April 2012 - 01:55 PM, said:

Long story short, just because people cry about something doesn't mean it's broken. It means they can't deal with it. There's a huge crowd of people who play fighting games while crying "No X character no Y character no supers no ultras it's all unfair!" too, but they're flat out wrong.

To the contrary, people cry about it because there is a problem. Yes, n00bs are always subject to complaining when they lose, but when you have enough seasoned veterans of a game getting upset over something, the game mechanics have an issue.

You are fighting an uphill battle by defending poptarting as being a balanced tactic. Why are pilots in Gladiators and "Warlords" so commonly on top of the charts in MW4, even to this day? Because they have 55+ tons of ERPPCs and Gauss Rifles to play with and jump jets to hide while they recycle, effectively destroying the purpose of everything that isn't "alpha-strikeable", and that does not exceed 800 meters. MW4 was effectively reduced to 9-10 weapons out of the 150+ armaments available, all because of alpha-boating the heavy weapons. Ask yourself, have you ever seen a player win with long bore UACs? Has a stock Deimos ever beaten a Canis? There is no effective counter for jump sniping. Otherwise, people would be using it all the time, and poptarting would become obsolete. Ten years worth of poptarts support my claim, you cannot argue that.

@ Victor, we are both arguing over normatives and opinions here. IYO, it is alright to exploit what is exploitable. In fact, it seems you advocate for such things because you want something to continue exploiting. IMO, if the game has an issue, I will point it out. I will adhere to the fact that I cannot control a broken game mechanic or the people who spam them, but I will certainly find ways not to play with people that use them for cheap kills.

Edited by Lord Trogus, 12 April 2012 - 03:37 PM.

[Thomas Oreland]

Anyone who has ever played a MW game against an actual player has been LEGGED possibly to death literally.

So if they allow us to armor literally however we want then I have afew additions to the thought. Balance.... literal weight balance. If you put to much weight on one side or another then you running the risk of falling over on the wrong tilt of ground. Your gyro can't compensate enough.

Armoring legs to the no way your going to 1-2 alphashot kill em.... means your taxing the motors that MOVE the legs alot... so be prepare to keep you speed low or risk blowing the leg motors.

Really I'm for if they blow your armor of a leg and start dmging the insides then with every hit on that leg starts to slow you down. If a leg has no armor anymore and the motors are dmgd now and the actual structure of the leg is last to go. Once that leg is gone your falling over simple as that! None of this but I have another leg BS. If the leg is gone sure I'll allow if you have jump jets you MIGHT be able to kinda jump around and do stuff but each time you land on the one leg your dmging it!

This frown on legging thing bring another thought I had when I was talking about this game witha friend If you don't like the fact some guy legged ppl PUT A CONTRACT ON HIM. I think the mercs should be able to accept a contract killing then come into an active combat event and kill him to fufill the contract... yes i do mean while he's online in alive match.... tada your buddy is a douchebag and hope that the mercs are only going to try to get him and not see if they can fight 1-12vs 24 So when you take a contract as a merc thats on an individual it tells you where he is fighting and you can go there alone or gather you merc company then go to kill him. If the mercs stay to try to kill both parties cause they felt adventurous and they win then full salvage of the field goes to that company of mercs!


ok i'm done with my ramble. Happy Hunting!

Edited by Thomas Oreland, 12 April 2012 - 03:39 PM.

[Zylo]

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

This is NOT how TT or the books described 31st century combat, and it is a complete departure from what the original series stood for. LRMs and short range weapons have become completely obsolete because of tactics like jump sniping and boating.

I think there is a perfect solution to jump sniping if aiming is handled similar to the WoT aiming system where any movement increases the area your shot could land. If you are standing still your chance of making that headshot at long range should be far greater than doing it while hitting the jumpjets to pop up over a building while zoomed in on the enemy mech's cockpit.

[Motionless]

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

This is NOT how TT or the books described 31st century combat, and it is a complete departure from what the original series stood for.

That's because it attempts to glorify an ancient "stand and deliver" type of fighting. And while some might not call it as 'honorable,' the smart thing to do is hide in the bush and shoot from there. Due to limitations that turn based games have, and due to the ideals of book writers is what that made that image. But when brought to practice -- it simply would not work like that.

As much as we try to make it otherwise in literature, when it comes down to it, when it's time to fight we'll always end up face down on our bellies crawling thru the dirt and setting up 'cheap' traps and tactics so that we can win/not die/get paid/defend homeland and family/etc.


Just because people complain about something (even vets) doesn't mean it should go. People do not have a good sense of everything that goes into a game to ultimately make it something they would want to play -- most players would ruin their games (unintentionally) to the point where they wouldn't even play it if they had their say in how everything went. That's why I was surprised to see a 'suggestions' section for a game's forum when people haven't even played it.

[Magnificent Bastard]

I don't get what all the fuss is about. Legging is a logical tactic. And as far as the game mechanics go... clearly PGI isn't comprised of a bunch of retarded mentally challenged special monkeys. They're not going to make the same mistakes that have been made in the past. Welcome to the future boys. Get your heads out of the 90s.

[Trogusaur]

Victor Morson, on 12 April 2012 - 01:55 PM, said:

It's not an exploited tactic. I tend to go for legs if:

A: The 'mech has huge legs (such as an Atlas) and
B: The 'mech isn't moving very fast or
C: Has taken pre-existing leg damage, making it the weak spot.

It is not as easy to hit the legs of a decent pilot and very rough on some 'mechs (are you seriously saying that it's as easy to hit a Raven's legs going full bore at long range, and that it is the same difficulty required to nail it's side torso? Really?) .. if you have a damage-over-time weapon like a beam laser (provided they do them like that) you're never, ever going to sink 100% of your beam's damage into a moving leg, but you will be able to do it on torsos.

First of all, did I not say two posts ago that legging was especially effective against heavier 'mechs? Yes, a Raven's legs are very hard to hit, but is the Raven itself not impossible to hit anyway? The 'mech is a twig to begin with, and it runs almost as fast as a car on a highway.
http://www.google.co...29,r:0,s:0,i:69 (there's your Atlas.)
http://www.google.co...122&tx=64&ty=54
http://www.google.co...29,r:0,s:0,i:67
http://www.google.co...29,r:4,s:0,i:75
http://mwomercs.com/...awesome-concept
http://mwomercs.com/...nturion-concept


Want more? Even MW:O's concept legs combined are 5x larger than the CT, as stated.

Edited by Lord Trogus, 12 April 2012 - 04:20 PM.

[Grinner]

The issues I have with legging and pop tarting stem from the disconnect between table top game mechanics and real time simulation mechanics.

Previous iterations of the Mechwarrior game, through either technical limitations or choices by the game developers, have not represented mech combat as I envision the table top rules intended. I realize of course that no real time simulation could ever completely mirror a turn based strategy game, nor should it, but some of the limitations/choices have fundamentally changed the flavor of the game, and that I take issue with.

Legging
In the Table Top game, intentionally legging a 'mech (other than through physical attacks) is practically impossible. You can certainly destroy a leg through combat by repeatedly hitting it, but that is up to the luck of the dice. However, while destruction of a leg severely limits the capability of that 'mech to engage the enemy, it can still prop itself up with one arm and fire down range, meaning it is still a threat provided it has team mates to protect it from getting stomped into oblivion by the enemy.

Mechwarrior 4 was the first game to at least allow a 'mech with a destroyed leg to continue to fight, MW3 leg destruction equaled 'mech destruction, and even in the MW:LL mod destruction of a leg effectively removes your 'mech from battle, as falls are based on physics and there is no ability to right yourself and fire from the ground due to technical limitations. Staring out at the ground in front of one's cockpit does not make one a viable combatant.

MWO seems to be taking great pains to make this game more readily reflect the game system upon which it is based. Delayed weapon convergence, different reticles for torso and arm mounted weaponry, (hopefully given the advances in technology) more realistically modeled leg articulation, movement and hit location information, and damage over time laser weaponry means that pin point laser accurate strikes on moving legs will likely be much harder than in previous games. I don't think we know enough about the game system to do anything more than speculate about what will happen when a leg is destroyed like this however. Will the mech topple and remain active but immobile? Will it limp around the battlefield until someone puts more damage into the leg like in MW4? Will it be instantly destroyed? We don't know yet and I'm interested to see how PGI will handle this as they've been so faithful to everything else in the table top game.

Poptarting
The big disconnect here is the difference between real time and turn based gameplay. There's no such thing as poptarting in the table top game, as all weapons cycle at the same speed, i.e. once the round is over your weapons are ready to fire again in the next round. So if you pop over a hill to target an enemy he will respond in kind every time you do so. Taking long range, high damage, long recycle weapons in Mechwarrior allows one to expose themselves only briefly to fire, letting their weapons recycle while they are back behind cover. I don't so much have a problem with this as I do with how previous Mechwarrior games have handled jumping.

Engaging jump jets and hurtling massive, multi-ton machines of war through the air should not be the serene floating experience that MW4 depicted. In the table top, jumping incurs a large penalty to one's accuracy, and floaty jump mechanics paired with pin point, instant damage, instant travel weaponry could be and was very often abused.

Again, PGI looks to have taken steps to avoid these previous pit falls, as mentioned earlier. If this is combined with a shaking, trembling screen as your 'mech rises off the ground atop pillars of vented plasma and then plummets back down to earth with teeth gnashing force, I think pop tarting won't be as much of an issue. I don't mind the tactic, only the implementation. If someone pops his Grasshopper *crossed fingers, great mech* over the hill to blast at me with his lasers, I can at least be consoled by the fact that those beams will likely be sweeping all over my mech and spreading the damage as opposed to punching through a single location.

Edited by Grinner, 12 April 2012 - 04:35 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

I fail to understand how people get "invalid tactic" when I am saying "broken tactic". I agree 100% that legging, alpha striking, and poptarting are valid, they are within the game's parameters. However, call me a "traditionalist", but all of them are ridiculous in my book. The initial premise of Battletech and Mechwarrior was that you are in a walking tank, shooting each other with the most advanced weapons known to what writers could think of. This includes energy weapons, ballistics and missles. Now (as of MW4), this dream has been reduced to jumping PPC raves in the largest 'mech possible. This is NOT how TT or the books described 31st century combat, and it is a complete departure from what the original series stood for. LRMs and short range weapons have become completely obsolete because of tactics like jump sniping and boating.

• Because you don't like something does not make it broken. None of these are broken.
  
• The novels and fluff frequently talks about using speed to dodge shots and even blowing off legs. On purpose.
  
• Legging has nothing to do with people piloting heavier weight classes. Smaller faster 'mechs are harder to leg.
  
• I can't think of a single MechWarrior game where ballistics have become outdated and missiles have been great in most of them, barring IS LRMs in MW4.
  
• Short range weapons are obsolete? Oh, man. In what game? MW4 turned entirely short range at the end.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

Don't get me wrong, the game allowed it, so there is no reason why leggers and poptarts can't leg and tart, as long as the other players at least have a place to play the "original way". However, that certainly does not mean I want to see it in future games. MW:O is adhering as close to TT as possible, and from what I understand, jumpsniping was not powerful enough to exploit, and legging was balanced.

I hate to tell you again, but because things don't match your preference or what you pictured in your head does not make it the "original way." You can actually play a pop tarting 'mech PPC boat pretty solidly on table top (jumping across partial cover), and the to-hit modifiers and such pretty accurately represent what happens in MechWarrior.

As for legging being balanced, maybe you haven't kicked off as many 'mech legs as I have.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

To the contrary, people cry about it because there is a problem. Yes, n00bs are always subject to complaining when they lose, but when you have enough seasoned veterans of a game getting upset over something, the game mechanics have an issue.

Playing something for a while doesn't necessarily make you good. Many - the majority, honestly - of veterans think legging and jump sniping are entirely fine tactics. The problem is you have a vocal minority that won't shut up about it, and that's why this keeps coming up over and over. It's a very, very vocal minority but a minority none the less. Just because a small group keeps making tons of waves doesn't mean they are right, or anyone should change anything on their behalf.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

You are fighting an uphill battle by defending poptarting as being a balanced tactic. Why are pilots in Gladiators and "Warlords" so commonly on top of the charts in MW4, even to this day? Because they have 55+ tons of ERPPCs and Gauss Rifles to play with and jump jets to hide while they recycle, effectively destroying the purpose of everything that isn't "alpha-strikeable", and that does not exceed 800 meters.

Because the Gladiator is a frightening 'mech, that's why. Have you seen the one with CLPLs and a targeting computer on table top? Holy crap, now that is a balance issue.

In fact if we were to import the glorious Table Top rules wholesale to MWO, CLPLs is all anyone would take, ever, for the Clans.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

MW4 was effectively reduced to 9-10 weapons out of the 150+ armaments available, all because of alpha-boating the heavy weapons. Ask yourself, have you ever seen a player win with long bore UACs? Has a stock Deimos ever beaten a Canis? There is no effective counter for jump sniping. Otherwise, people would be using it all the time, and poptarting would become obsolete. Ten years worth of poptarts support my claim, you cannot argue that.

MW4 UACs were always not very good just due the way they operated. If you ask the same question about, say, MWLL (which is even more hardcore about legging and has very viable pop tarts) I'd tell you that UACs are one of the best weapons in the game. Again, you're basically saying legging and pop tarting somehow broke UACs, instead of UACs just being broken.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 03:26 PM, said:

@ Victor, we are both arguing over normatives and opinions here. IYO, it is alright to exploit what is exploitable. In fact, it seems you advocate for such things because you want something to continue exploiting. IMO, if the game has an issue, I will point it out. I will adhere to the fact that I cannot control a broken game mechanic or the people who spam them, but I will certainly find ways not to play with people that use them for cheap kills.

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that these things are not exploits. I'm against exploits. But these mechanics in past games have worked entirely as intended and there's a small handful of people who get upset about them so constantly raise vocal threads like this one to complain about it.

Again, despite your opinion that you somehow speak for the community, those with your views are and always have been the minority. It's just that they are so frustrated by being legged, they post and post and post, so it looks like they're a bigger segment than they already are.

We had this conversation round and round back on the MWLL forums. Smoke Jag was bitterly anti-legging and as such steadily raised a large amount of complaints about it to the tune of "Deal with it" from just about everybody, including the developers. The thing is, Smoke Jag just wouldn't stop complaining about it - over and over and over again - so it looked like a huge issue. In fact, several members of their group got banned from the forums for making up entirely fake accounts just to make the anti-legging sentiment look larger. I'm not kidding. Those of us who have been hardcore MechWarrior players for years are generally pro-legging as a properly functioning tactic that is a viable alternative to other methods of destroying a 'mech. Also, a very vocal 2% doesn't make that 2% right.

Grinner, on 12 April 2012 - 04:23 PM, said:

Legging
In the Table Top game, intentionally legging a 'mech (other than through physical attacks) is practically impossible. You can certainly destroy a leg through combat by repeatedly hitting it, but that is up to the luck of the dice. However, while destruction of a leg severely limits the capability of that 'mech to engage the enemy, it can still prop itself up with one arm and fire down range, meaning it is still a threat provided it has team mates to protect it from getting stomped into oblivion by the enemy.

I'd argue this is actually incorrect; if a 'mechs leg takes serious damage, a good player will steadily try to hit the 'mech on that side of it's damaged leg. i.e. if the left leg gets smacked, they try to focus fire on the left side of the 'mech. That increases the chance of destroying the leg by a huge margin and is a tactic frequently employed, very effectively, by the people I play with. It's not the same as calling a shot, no, but it does the trick very often as is an intended result.

Grinner, on 12 April 2012 - 04:23 PM, said:

Poptarting
The big disconnect here is the difference between real time and turn based gameplay. There's no such thing as poptarting in the table top game, as all weapons cycle at the same speed, i.e. once the round is over your weapons are ready to fire again in the next round.

Again, I have to disagree; if you jump from partial cover to partial cover before firing shots, you are given a to-hit penalty and a to-hit defensive modifier that basically simulates pop-tarting. The partial cover + jumping ends up being about on par with the added difficulty of hitting a jumping 'mech in the simulation. I'd say it's reasonably close enough to say that there's no way to really rationalize what's happening as anything other than pop-tarting, if you think of how it'd play out in real time.

Motionless, on 12 April 2012 - 04:01 PM, said:

That's because it attempts to glorify an ancient "stand and deliver" type of fighting. And while some might not call it as 'honorable,' the smart thing to do is hide in the bush and shoot from there. Due to limitations that turn based games have, and due to the ideals of book writers is what that made that image. But when brought to practice -- it simply would not work like that.

I'd also argue that it really depends on the era and who is writing. Using cover, maneuverability and speed were big things in earlier books, where the fighting tended to be over fast and the main stories were about politics and such.

Around the civil war era when every book turned into what basically amounted to a text written summary of a TT/MW game recap with paper thin filler between fights, then it got pretty terrible.*

* There was one later book based around the Cappelan Confederation where an entire unit - the Arcade Rangers I believe - based their entire combat doctrine on timed pop tarting. Just a FYI.

Edited by Victor Morson, 12 April 2012 - 05:45 PM.

[Jetset Quasar]

Legs are part of the mech...you need to learn to protect them. Legging is the most efficent way to kill some mechs i.e Annilator ( could also shoot the head) Becuase legging has become so "taboo" a lot of guys take all the armour off their legs and put it elsewhere...which just makes it easier for me to kill them. In "war" a mechwarroir would not stop and say I can't shoot his legs cause he'll get mad at me....You can't get mad when your dead....So if you get shot in the legs build a bridge and respawn.

[Trogusaur]

Victor Morson, on 12 April 2012 - 05:19 PM, said:

• Because you don't like something does not make it broken. None of these are broken.
  
• The novels and fluff frequently talks about using speed to dodge shots and even blowing off legs. On purpose.
  
• Legging has nothing to do with weight class. Smaller faster 'mechs are harder to leg.
  
• I can't think of a single MechWarrior game where ballistics have become outdated and missiles have been great in most of them, barring IS LRMs in MW4.
  
• Short range weapons are obsolete? Oh, man. In what game? MW4 turned entirely short range at the end

... And again I will state that I have no preference against legging in particular. I have an issue when something is so spammed that it becomes the alpha strategy of the game, and there is no effective way to counter it. Name a single tried and true counter for jump sniping, and I might believe that it's not broken. Name one reason why players shouldn't two shot kill the most obvious target on the enemy, and I will fullheartedly reconsider my position.

Quote

In fact if we were to import the glorious Table Top rules wholesale to MWO, CLPLs is all anyone would take, ever, for the Clans

That isn't possible because the Clans refuse to leave weapons range or ambush due to zellbringen. IMO, they have some class.

Quote

MW4 UACs were always not very good just due the way they operated. If you ask the same question about, say, MWLL (which is even more hardcore about legging and has very viable pop tarts) I'd tell you that UACs are one of the best weapons in the game. Again, you're basically saying legging and pop tarting somehow broke UACs, instead of UACs just being broken.

To the contrary, UACs were perfectly balanced... if you factor out poptarting.
MW4's damage ratios:
CGauss - 18damage/7sec= 2.57 damage/sec..........13 tons
Cultra AC5- 5damage/1.5sec = 3.33 damage/sec.....8 tons
Cultra AC2- 2.5damage/1sec= 2.5 damage/sec........6 tons.

Factor in multiples of Autocannons and limited knockback to compensate for the Gauss's heavier tonnage and they *should* be more powerful in every regard. Why not? Because everyone wants to play HugthewallandjumpWarrior.

Quote

I can't think of a single MechWarrior game where ballistics have become outdated and missiles have been great in most of them, barring IS LRMs in MW4.

Ever played MW2? Any old schmo could outfit a Rifleman as an LRM-20 boat and utterly destroy a Dire Wolf in two hits. Note how laser raves have been present in every game since then, and not a single Autocannon smaller than an AC-20 ever gets it's props for anything.

Quote

Again, despite your opinion that you somehow speak for the community, those with your views are and always have been the minority. It's just that they are so frustrated by being legged, they post and post and post, so it looks like they're a bigger segment than they already are.

I'm sorry, did I ever say I spoke for the community? The community varies in opinion, just as you have found someone that staunchly disagrees with you. I am speaking on the behalf of logic. Take a trip to the ICM HOLA server, and you will find that despite the lack of NHUA, the poptarting, 4 ERPPC Gladiator is still the king of the battlefield. Just because I am the minority does not mean I have a point. From that perspective, the minority is stupid for ever having outfitted a fast-recycle weapon, and 90% of all weapons should just be taken out. The minority does not use 95+ ton 'mechs, the minority does not boat with as many super-weapons possible, and the minority does not group-leg the opponent in organized team battles just to decommission the better players. Yes, legging, and poptarting ARE overpowered. The majority uses both for a reason.

It is apparent that we are both extremely vocal on this topic. I am not simply "that guy who won't shut up", notice how your posts have exponentially increased as well. We can debate this to death, but it will not take away from the fact that legging and poptarting are common and quick ways to down a 'mech while taking minimal damage. I think we can both agree to disagree over the rest.

Edited by Lord Trogus, 12 April 2012 - 06:15 PM.

[Jetset Quasar]

My post above yours sums up what your trying to say less words thou....you don't make a good point, most of your post is just babble, and your repeating yourself, be more precise...

Edited by Dawn Treader, 12 April 2012 - 06:07 PM.

[Trogusaur]

With all due respect, if you don't like it, you are always free to leave and grace your presence on another thread.

Edited by Lord Trogus, 12 April 2012 - 06:16 PM.

[Grinner]

Victor Morson, on 12 April 2012 - 05:19 PM, said:

I'd argue this is actually incorrect; if a 'mechs leg takes serious damage, a good player will steadily try to hit the 'mech on that side of it's damaged leg. i.e. if the left leg gets smacked, they try to focus fire on the left side of the 'mech. That increases the chance of destroying the leg by a huge margin and is a tactic frequently employed, very effectively, by the people I play with. It's not the same as calling a shot, no, but it does the trick very often as is an intended result

I agree with you partially here. Firing from the front or rear arc grants a 1/9 chance of hitting any particular leg or 2/9 for the legs in general, while firing from the left or right side grant a bit better than 1/6 chance of hitting the corresponding leg or a 1/4 chance of hitting the legs in general. So you can improve your chance of taking a leg off, but it's not anything like taking an aimed shot at the legs, as you yourself mentioned.

As I said in my post though, I don't really have an issue with targeting the legs, I absolutely agree that it's a viable tactic to slow or incapacitate an enemy. My concern is what happens to a 'mech that has been legged in this way. Again, in the table top it is still able to prop itself up provided it has both arms and return fire up until it loses an arm, or even to attempt to stand though the roll is rather difficult. In short, legging a 'mech should not instantly remove it from the battlefield or make it a non-threat, only hinder it greatly.

Also, the pin point, instantaneous damage made targeting and destruction of legs, or any location, incredibly easy. Mechwarrior 4 chose to circumvent this by inflating armor values so that repeated hits could be shrugged off what would have cored through mechs in the table top game. MWO will likely inflate the armor values somewhat, but they seem to be coming closer to the table top game's randomness in that multiple factors will likely reduce the amount of direct damage any one location takes at any one time.

Again, we still don't know how leg destruction will be handled, and I eagerly await seeing how they adress this.

Victor Morson, on 12 April 2012 - 05:19 PM, said:

Again, I have to disagree; if you jump from partial cover to partial cover before firing shots, you are given a to-hit penalty and a to-hit defensive modifier that basically simulates pop-tarting. The partial cover + jumping ends up being about on par with the added difficulty of hitting a jumping 'mech in the simulation. I'd say it's reasonably close enough to say that there's no way to really rationalize what's happening as anything other than pop-tarting, if you think of how it'd play out in real time.

Again, I don't really disagree with jumping from cover to cover, I much prefer mobile jumping mechs sniping from range as opposed to turret-like assault mechs or the simple bruisers. But you're missing the key point, that jumping from cover to cover also imposes penalties on the attacker as well as the defender. It is still an entirely viable tactic, and one I employ often, but I have to contend with that +3 to the target number from using jumping movement. There is a corresponding penalty to my attacks even as my movement and use of cover makes it harder for the enemy to target me.

My contention is that previous 'mech games, MW4 and MW:LL included, have not really reflected this penalty to the attacker. Both have overly floaty jump mechanics that have little to no effect on the ability of the attacker to accurately hit his target. Combined again with instant damage, instant travel, high damage weapons that hit exactly where I aim every time, that makes jumping from cover to cover a tremendous advantage to the attacker with little to no draw back aside from added heat, which is of little concern if you can cool down and recycle your weapons behind a hill.

All I would hope is that "poptarting" impose same penalty to the attacker as it does in the table top, i.e. make the screen shake and rattle, the cross hairs jiggle a little bit to reflect all that tonnage rocketing through the sky. I want to know that when I jump from cover and lay the hurt on someone on the other side of a ridge, it is because I'm a good pilot, not because the game mechanics make it absolutely beneficial for no draw back.

[Victor Morson]

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

... And again I will state that I have no preference against legging in particular. I have an issue when something is so spammed that it becomes the alpha strategy of the game, and there is no effective way to counter it. Name a single tried and true counter forjump sniping , and I might believe that it's not broken.

Direct fire weapons, such as lasers and pulse lasers (game dependent) will utterly blow the snot out of a jump sniper. Advancing on them with Autocannon heavy brawlers ruins their day too.
In addition of jumping makes a large amount of heat (something MW4 admittedly did poorly but MWLL does very well) it's not nearly as invincible as you seem to think.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

That isn't possible because the Clans refuse to leave weapons range or ambush due to zellbringen.

"Leave weapons range" - What? And refuse to ambush? Oh, man. So many people don't understand Zellbringen. There are no rules against ambushing or surprise attacking people in Zell. Also if you think Zell will figure at all into MWO, you may be completely mad.

Finally, what does any of that have to do with the fact the Clan Large Pulse Laser is vastly, vastly overpowered in Table Top? That's not even remotely connected to what I said.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

To the contrary, UACs were perfectly balanced... if you factor out poptarting.
MW4's damage ratios:
CGauss - 18damage/7sec= 2.57 damage/sec..........13 tons
Cultra AC5- 5damage/1.5sec = 3.33 damage/sec.....8 tons
Cultra AC2- 2.5damage/1sec= 2.5 damage/sec........6 tons.

No, in MW4 it was pretty terrible because of the existence of LBX, not pop-tarting. LBX/10 and LBX/20 were simply way better than their UAC counterparts on almost every level in that game (for a lot of reasons, including hit boxes) so it utterly outdated the UAC. It had nothing to do with pop tarting- and that's LBX was always, always popular in MW4.

I'm assuming we're talking 10/20, because 2/5 have always been a terrible, terrible joke (except in Living Legends as anti-air). If you think AC2 or AC5 would ever be taken even if jump jets didn't exist in the game, you are way off.

Unless you're talking Hard Core, at which point UAC5s were apparently nearly overpowered - jump snipers be damned. They shredded them.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

Factor in multiples of Autocannons and limited knockback to compensate for the Gauss's heavier tonnage and they *should* be more powerful in every regard. Why not? Because everyone wants to play HugthewallandjumpWarrior.

Are you seriously trying to say UAC/5 would be superior to Gauss if not for jump snipers? Because it's not. It's not on any level, ever, anywhere, for any reason. Like I said above, in a game with no jumpers, it's traditionally a God awful weapon except in HC, where it shines against snipers. So your point is really, really off base.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

Ever played MW2? Any old schmo could outfit a Rifleman as an LRM-20 boat and utterly destroy a Dire Wolf in two hits. Note how laser raves have been present in every game since then, and not a single Autocannon smaller than an AC-20 .

Because, again, the AC2/5 (other than RACs) have been terrible, terrible weapons in every single game. Table Top, MW1, MW2, MW3, MW4.. the only exceptions are Hardcore (buffed) and Living Legends (anti-air). LRM/20s were also one of the top-tier overpowered weapons in MW2 for a bunch of reasons, so I don't get why you are basically saying that should be the new primary tactic? How on Earth is that better than legging?

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

I'm sorry, did I ever say I spoke for the community? The community varies in opinion, just as you have found someone that staunchly disagrees with you. I am speaking on the behalf of logic.

I think logic needs some better PR.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

Take a trip to the ICM HOLA server, and you will find that despite the lack of NHUA, the poptarting, 4 ERPPC Gladiator is still the king of the battlefield. Just because I am the minority does not mean I have a point. From that perspective, the minority is stupid for ever having outfitted a fast-recycle weapon, and 90% of all weapons should just be taken out.

I hate to tell you but a 4 CERPPC Gladiator is going to blow the crap out of a half dozen AC/2 wielding 'mechs because, well, those are good guns on a good 'mech. I'm really, really not sure what this has to do with legging, at all. Are we even on topic anymore?

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

The minority does not use 95+ ton 'mechs, the minority does not boat with as many super-weapons possible, and the minority does not group-leg the opponent in organized team battles just to decommission the better players. Yes, legging and poptarting, and boating are overpowered. The majority uses both for a reason.

There's a small group of people that thing the game should have no legging and no pop tarting, but also terrible 'mech designs should be viable and terrible guns should have a place. The problem is, they are terrible for a reason. You are never, ever going to make a config designed to be bad good, because it's bad.

In this one rant you've basically claimed a light weight UAC/5 wileding 'mech should be able to tear apart a 95 tonner with 4 ER PPCs, and not only that, the reason it supposedly can't do so is because the 95 tonner can jump. I think we're so far off the rails here that this conversation has jumped into the territory of 5 other threads.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

It is apparent that we are both extremely vocal on this topic. I am not simply "that guy who won't shut up", notice how your posts have exponentially increased as well.

That's the problem when I reply to everything being said and so much is being said at me. I'm not coming up with new scenarios and points, just responding. Not much else I can do but ignore them.

Lord Trogus, on 12 April 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

We can debate this to death, but it will not take away from the fact that legging and poptarting are common and quick ways to down a 'mech with taking minimal damage. I think we can both agree to disagree over the rest.

Well while you are trying to "quickly take down a 'mech" and shooting at legs going all over the place, I think I'll be busy blowing your side torso open.

The real comedy about my defense of legging is I don't do it often unless an opening presents itself exactly because it is not nearly as viable as anti-leggers think. I'm incredibly pro legging and I think it's a bad idea in 90% of situations - the fastest kill is usually the torso!

Likewise I think pop tarting is highly effective but I'd never want an entire company of pop tarts - some high-damage direct fire laser boats will make fast work of them to say the least and ultimately most pop-tarts take so much resource to field that you can get some brawlers in on them and tear them to bits. It's a support role, not some Godly dominance that people that don't know how to deal with it perceive it as.

.. as a side note, the first time we ever encountered pop tarts (when it was a new strategy) we got torn to bits. We thought it was an unstoppable tactic from hell and ate 4+ losses in a row that night. So we went to the drawing board, adopted it and picked up counters for it. The next week, we wrecked the team right back with only 2/8 pop tarts, and this was in MW4, arguably the most pop-tart friendly of the franchise.