10 replies to this topic

[TheCerberus]

Apparently all the beta threads were preserved, but I can't find my old one even with a search, so I'm gonna have to start fresh. A lot of this is different, I've thought about what others have said and of course have played more, so even if I find my old thread a fresh start is probably a good thing.

This is my ongoing observations and thoughts about the game, I'll do my best to post thoughts about things that have already been posted in those respective areas.

1. 'mechs should be knocked down more often, the latest update has apparently removed knockdowns entirely and I really hope that's because it's glitchy and needs work rather than because it's never going to come back
I think pilots should have a chance to get their 'mech stable with some sort of indication of which way their 'mech is stumbling and about to fall (such as the cockpit tipping or the 'mech shifting in that direction). They can then attempt to pull it back in the opposite direction and stop it from falling down, but this would add an element of skill and control to it rather than just being a random effect.
I think the conditions under which a 'mech can lose balance should include:
a. Collisions (much more severe effect when colliding with bigger 'mechs too - it's much too easy for a light 'mech pilot to circle a big 'mech and doesn't really take any skill if they can collide fearlessly)
b. Falling a long way (from walking off cliffs or carelessly jump jetting, the damage isn't really much of a deterrent)
c. Taking too much damage from ballistic and missile weapons, something like if it takes 20 points of damage in less than 5 seconds it risks getting knocked down
d. Running into trees and walls. Sure, 'mechs are big, but so are trees and buildings. This will again add more emphasis on piloting skill rather than just focusing on shooting.

2. I think having a leg destroyed should immediately cause a 'mech to fall over (but still be able to get up again). Considering the amount of armour legs have (almost as much as CT front) just slowing the target down is a small payoff. I personally just core the target's CT because it's easier and actually gets a kill. A 'mech falling down would be much more satisfying and dramatic. In line with #1 above, a 'mech that has lost a leg should be easier to knock down.

4. I really would like to see penalties for overheating long before reaching shutdown - 'mechs start slowing down and the torso and arms become less responsive, targeting computers start to get flaky and the HUD gets riddled with static, and the pilot begins to get blurry vision and blackouts if it gets too hot. Make the heat problems gradual and immersive rather than just a binary "not overheated/overheated" thing that really doesn't give any feel for the intense heat.

5. I think critical hits would be very interesting and immersive, especially things like Gyro/Engine damage. A gyro hit should make a 'mech much more prone to being knocked down (back to #1), engine crits obviously cause heat issues. Cockpit hits could come with some gruesome end to the poor mechwarrior. Life support would make overheating really nasty and toxic environments could flood in, and sensors would obviously mess up the HUD and radar. I don't just mean critical hits when internal structure is hit, there should also be a chance of every single hit causing a critical (as in Battletech) but it should of course be a very small chance (1%, maybe decreased/increased with the damage of the hit).

6. Minimum range for Gauss, nerf indirect LRM fire, not going into depth for these. I will join in the many other threads elsewhere for discussion.

7. Bigger rewards for players that contribute to defending the base (killing 'mechs that attempt to capture) and taking part in attacking the enemy base (being one of the 'mechs that contribute to a capture).


Anything after here is not something I consider vital to the feel, style and enjoyment of the game. It's just something I would like to see.

I think armour ratings should be reduced by half, back to their original Battletech levels. Yes, weapons can shoot at least twice in 10 seconds (effectively doubling damage output and countering the extra armour) but this is precedented in the Mechwarrior duelling rules and should be there without the double armour. This would make the action more intense, and bring back the power of the heavy-hitters like the AC/20 and Gauss because they would be able to get headshot kills and drill through back armor in one shot like they do in Battletech. Light 'mechs will fear the AC/20 once more, even Assaults will need to be wary.
This could be another matchup option, ie players can click on a 'hardcore' tick box and all damage is doubled (simpler than halving armour on everyone's custom loadouts, of course).

Obviously skill/weight based matchups are in the works, so I wont add anything about that. How about an option for having games with exclusively one weight class of 'mech. I.e. light 'mech, medium 'mech, heavy 'mech and assault 'mech matches.

Edited by TheCerberus, 31 October 2012 - 06:11 AM.

[pursang]

TheCerberus, on 31 October 2012 - 04:57 AM, said:

Apparently all the beta threads were preserved, but I can't find my old one even with a search, so I'm gonna have to start fresh.

This is my ongoing observations and thoughts about the game, I'll do my best to post thoughts about things that have already been posted in those respective areas.


1. 'mechs should be knocked down more often, the latest update has apparently removed knockdowns entirely and I really hope that's because it's glitchy and needs work rather than because it's never going to come back
I think pilots should have a chance to get their 'mech stable with some sort of indication of which way their 'mech is stumbling and about to fall (such as the cockpit tipping or the 'mech shifting in that direction). They can then attempt to pull it back in the opposite direction and stop it from falling down, but this would add an element of skill and control to it rather than just being a random effect.
I think the conditions under which a 'mech can lose balance should include:
a. Collisions (much more severe effect when colliding with bigger 'mechs too - it's much too easy for a light 'mech pilot to circle a big 'mech and doesn't really take any skill since they can collide all they want)
b. Falling a long way (from walking off cliffs or carelessly jump jetting, the damage isn't really much of a deterrent)
c. Taking too much damage from ballistic and missile weapons, something like if it takes 20 points of damage in less than 5 seconds it risks getting knocked down

2. I think having a leg destroyed should immediately cause a 'mech to fall over (but still be able to get up again). Considering the amount of armour legs have (almost as much as CT front) just slowing the target down is a small payoff. I personally just core the target's CT because it's easier and actually gets a kill. A 'mech falling down would be much more satisfying and dramatic. In line with #1 above, a 'mech that has lost a leg should be easier to knock down.

3. I think armour ratings should be reduced by half, back to their original Battletech levels. Yes, weapons can shoot at least twice in 10 seconds (effectively doubling damage output and countering the extra armour) but this is precedented in the Mechwarrior duelling rules and should be there without the double armour. This would make the action more intense, and bring back the power of the heavy-hitters like the AC/20 and Gauss because they would be able to get headshot kills and drill through back armor in one shot like they do in Battletech. Light 'mechs will fear the AC/20 once more, even Assaults will need to be wary.

4. I really would like to see penalties for overheating long before reaching shutdown - 'mechs start slowing down and the torso and arms become less responsive, targeting computers start to get flaky and the HUD gets riddled with static, and the pilot begins to get blurry vision and blackouts if it gets too hot. Make the heat problems gradual and immersive rather than just a binary "not overheated/overheated" thing that really doesn't give any feel for the intense heat.

5. I would really love to see critical hits, especially things like Gyro/Engine damage. A gyro hit should make a 'mech much more prone to being knocked down (back to #1), engine crits obviously cause heat issues. Cockpit hits could come with some gruesome end to the poor mechwarrior. Life support would make overheating really nasty and toxic environments could flood in, and sensors would obviously mess up the HUD and radar. I don't just mean critical hits when internal structure is hit, there should also be a chance of every single hit causing a critical (as in Battletech) but it should of course be a very small chance (1%, maybe decreased/increased with the damage of the hit).

6. Obviously skill/weight based matchups are in the works, so I wont add anything about that. How about an option for having games with exclusively one weight class of 'mech. I.e. light 'mech, medium 'mech, heavy 'mech and assault 'mech matches.

7. Minimum range for Gauss, nerf indirect LRM fire, not going into depth for these. I will join in the many other threads elsewhere for discussion.

There, cleaned it up a little.

[TheCerberus]

I did it myself with my edits before I saw your reply, yeah I know I should do the editing before actually posting

This thread should probably be in the suggestions area. I'm really not on the ball today.

Edited by TheCerberus, 31 October 2012 - 05:21 AM.

[TheCerberus]

I'm starting to think it would be a good idea for the bigger weapons to take up more hardpoints. Obviously some 'mechs would need to have their hardpoints tweaked a bit so they can fit their loadouts still, but it strikes me as weird that a 'mech with a SRM-2 can have that easily replaced with a LRM-20 (a weapon with 10x as many launch tubes!), or a small laser replaced by a PPC. I'm sure we've all already seen how this can be abused.

So here's what I think would be a better balance (all unlisted weapons I think should still take 1 hardpoint):
Energy slots:
Large laser (any type) - 2 slots
PPC (any type) - 2 slots
Ballistic slots:
AC/10 (normal or LBX) - 2 slots
AC/20 - 2 slots
Gauss rifle - 2 slots
Missile slots:
LRM-15 - 2 slots
LRM-20 - 2 slots

Alternatively, have "large" slots and "small" slots. Both slots can fit only one weapon, but the "large" slots can fit the bigger ones (ie the ones I think should take 2 slots). So in the case of my HBK-4G, the 3 ballistic slots in the right shoulder could be replaced by a single "large" ballistic slot.

Edited by TheCerberus, 04 November 2012 - 03:20 AM.

[TheCerberus]

If the repair costs for Endo Steel and Ferro Fibrous were drastically increased then these would cease to be easy choices, as it would make it harder to make money even if it's easier to win battles. Mercenaries need to be cost effective. This could also be a better way of nerfing double heat sinks, make them work at true double efficiency but make them painfully expensive to replace.
Also I think Endo Steel should be a much more expensive upgrades. Ferro Fibrous only requires removing the outer shell of a 'mech, Endo Steel requires removing all the components from a 'mech and refitting them onto a completely different skeleton. We all know Endo Steel is the superior of the two upgrades anyway, there is no circumstance in which Ferro Fibrous is a better choice than Endo Steel, make it cost a suitable amount! It was 500,000 c-bills to refit my HBK-4G with Endo Steel, but I think I should have paid at least twice that amount to rebuild my 'mech from scratch.

Something else I'd like to see:
More variety in battlefields. Throw in some truly alien landscapes rather than predictable "brown earth, green plants, blue sky, white snow" stuff we see on Terra. Add some desolate moons, deep-space asteroids, jungle planets, dust storms, bright purple skies and yellow ground. There's an entire galaxy out there and we want to go out there and see it and blow the hell out of each other in exotic places.
Players will need to be more flexible in how they load out their 'mechs if they can't rely on the same circumstances every time, so there will be less optimised sniper/LRM loadouts dominating the open areas. Canon 'mechs always have close-range weapons as backups except in very rare cases for exactly this reason - warfare is unpredictable, especially for mercenaries.

Edited by TheCerberus, 07 November 2012 - 03:28 PM.

[TheCerberus]

I've had an idea for fixing the gauss rifle so it is less easy to abuse, which will actually allow them to maintain their full individual lethality while limiting their combined usage (that is, getting two or more gauss rifles and group firing them to get 30, 45, maybe even 60 damage in one very long range hit) in a way that makes sense..
Consider that gauss rifles use an immensely powerful magnetic field to project 100kg of iron (based on our current ammo/ton) at supersonic speed. If you have two gauss rifles near each other (ie on the same 'mech) the magnetic fields from the two weapons will interact and distort each other. So what I propose is that for a short time after a gauss rifle is fired (say, one second) any other gauss rifle shots (including those fired simultaneously with the first) will be slightly distorted (sending the projectile off at an angle to the left or right owing to the magnetic field from the first gauss changing the path of the second shot a small amount).
Alternatively, add "safety protocols" to gauss rifles to avoid the magnetic fields interfering with each other and causing catastrophic malfunctions. For one second after firing a gauss rifle, all other gauss rifles on that 'mech are put on hold and can't fire, and multiple gauss rifles can not be fired at once. If an attempt is made to fire multiple gauss together then the first one will fire and the other ones will not. The overall firing rate of each rifle will stay the same and this one second delay will not add to that (what is it, 4 or 5 seconds?) pilots will simply be required to fire them one at a time.
This way theres no need to change the damage/heat/do other balancing tweaks that will nerf what should be a potent weapon.

Edited by TheCerberus, 27 November 2012 - 07:37 AM.

[Josh Davion]

TheCerberus, on 27 November 2012 - 07:36 AM, said:

I've had an idea for fixing the gauss rifle so it is less easy to abuse, which will actually allow them to maintain their full individual lethality while limiting their combined usage (that is, getting two or more gauss rifles and group firing them to get 30, 45, maybe even 60 damage in one very long range hit) in a way that makes sense..
Consider that gauss rifles use an immensely powerful magnetic field to project 100kg of iron (based on our current ammo/ton) at supersonic speed. If you have two gauss rifles near each other (ie on the same 'mech) the magnetic fields from the two weapons will interact and distort each other. So what I propose is that for a short time after a gauss rifle is fired (say, one second) any other gauss rifle shots (including those fired simultaneously with the first) will be slightly distorted (sending the projectile off at an angle to the left or right owing to the magnetic field from the first gauss changing the path of the second shot a small amount).
Alternatively, add "safety protocols" to gauss rifles to avoid the magnetic fields interfering with each other and causing catastrophic malfunctions. For one second after firing a gauss rifle, all other gauss rifles on that 'mech are put on hold and can't fire, and multiple gauss rifles can not be fired at once. If an attempt is made to fire multiple gauss together then the first one will fire and the other ones will not. The overall firing rate of each rifle will stay the same and this one second delay will not add to that (what is it, 4 or 5 seconds?) pilots will simply be required to fire them one at a time.
This way theres no need to change the damage/heat/do other balancing tweaks that will nerf what should be a potent weapon.

I really like this idea. It makes logical sense from an engineering perspective and it doesn't break the lethality of the Gauss Rifle.

[Teralitha]

I disagree with most of your ideas, so Im just going to say no to all. They are shortsighted, ignorant, and noobish. It sounds like u havent played in months...

[TheCerberus]

Thank you Teralitha for that very constructive and observational reply. I have never before seen the word "noobish" used in such an inspirational way. You are a credit to this forum.

[AshMcCloud99]

TheCerberus, on 07 November 2012 - 02:46 PM, said:

If the repair costs for Endo Steel and Ferro Fibrous were drastically increased then these would cease to be easy choices, as it would make it harder to make money even if it's easier to win battles. Mercenaries need to be cost effective. This could also be a better way of nerfing double heat sinks, make them work at true double efficiency but make them painfully expensive to replace.
Also I think Endo Steel should be a much more expensive upgrades. Ferro Fibrous only requires removing the outer shell of a 'mech, Endo Steel requires removing all the components from a 'mech and refitting them onto a completely different skeleton. We all know Endo Steel is the superior of the two upgrades anyway, there is no circumstance in which Ferro Fibrous is a better choice than Endo Steel, make it cost a suitable amount! It was 500,000 c-bills to refit my HBK-4G with Endo Steel, but I think I should have paid at least twice that amount to rebuild my 'mech from scratch.

Something else I'd like to see:
More variety in battlefields. Throw in some truly alien landscapes rather than predictable "brown earth, green plants, blue sky, white snow" stuff we see on Terra. Add some desolate moons, deep-space asteroids, jungle planets, dust storms, bright purple skies and yellow ground. There's an entire galaxy out there and we want to go out there and see it and blow the hell out of each other in exotic places.
Players will need to be more flexible in how they load out their 'mechs if they can't rely on the same circumstances every time, so there will be less optimised sniper/LRM loadouts dominating the open areas. Canon 'mechs always have close-range weapons as backups except in very rare cases for exactly this reason - warfare is unpredictable, especially for mercenaries.

That makes perfect sense. I've played Classic BT for years and every time i do a endo steel mod on a mech it cost me an arm and leg . This makes sense. But i do have to say something about nerfing indirect fire LRM's, if you nerf this than what is the point of using the tag system than. The tag system was designed for indirect fireing of LRM's and Arrow IV systems in Classic BT.

Edited by AshMcCloud99, 28 November 2012 - 07:10 AM.

[TheCerberus]

LRMs have of course been nerfed recently so my point around that is a bit obsolete.
I agree with your point, TAG should be important for indirect fire. I have no problem with how effective indirect fire is right now as long as it has TAG support and I don't think that should.be nerfed at all. I would just like to see indirect fire that doesn't have TAG support be less effective.