532 replies to this topic

[MrPenguin]

Agelmar, on 06 November 2012 - 10:09 AM, said:

Everyone is missing the point.

The game is fun.

Enjoy it, or argue about math. Your call.

No, YOU'RE missing the point!

Its quite clear what the OP is trying to say, and I completely agree!

Its simple, to those of you who don't understand. --V

Spoiler

OP is saying that Timber Wolfs are the rawest mechs of all time.

OF ALL TIME!

Edited by MrPenguin, 06 November 2012 - 10:17 AM.

[Theron Branson]

I think the biggest issue with the game is that it's not another BT or MW it's World Of Mechs. I don't think PGI needs to worry about being sued if they used unseen mechs I think they should be more worried about copying WoT business model to the "T". I really thought when I was in Beta I was testing 1 pillar of the game just to iron out the bugs of the combat model. Then when OB was announced I said to myself, WOW, this is really the game? Now I like WoT and I do like this game but the way they designed the game from day one is all wrong. Why not do some of things that where done correctly with past MW games and build upon them then starting with the WoT business and game model? The answer is of course content and development time and talent. To get to the game that was talked about and envisioned would be an undertaking that I feel that PGI is unprepared for as gaming content takes far longer then ever to produce and investors want instant turn-around on their investment. With a small design pool and pressure to make money they are forced to release a product that they know is no where even close to being what it is supposed to be or what was envisioned. The overall game has now suffered due to this as has so many other games before it and will continue this way because companies figure that players like to play 1/4 of completed games and will stay around longer if we continue to produce content. This is partly true, everyone likes new content and features to make the game live and stay fresh for long periods of time but when the basics of the game are so messed up and so many pillars of the game just missing, I truly think this game will not last on their current strategy.

Before you all start saying "It's Open Beta" or "It's free to play", these are half truth's. This game is in Open Beta but shouldn't be imho as it's not for the masses by a long shot. For me, I purchased the founders mechs to support the game and spent more then a retail game so it should be imo be retail ready and then continue to release new content. I play this game and will through money at it because I DO want it to succeed and I love the BT/MW franchise but make it a BT/MW game and not a WoM game please.

[Purlana]

Agelmar, on 06 November 2012 - 10:09 AM, said:

Everyone is missing the point.

The game is fun.

Enjoy it, or argue about math. Your call.

Game could be more fun.

Also: Where the hell is my community warfare!

[Theron Branson]

Purlana, on 06 November 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

Game could be more fun.

Also: Where the hell is my community warfare!

I honestly think they don't have a clue on how the CW will work except for what WoT has done. That leaves them though with what to do with Mercs, Contracts and so on that BT/MW has always had. Sorry guys i'm very bitter at PGI becasue they could do it so much better then what they are doing and if PGI needs help I can help with the CW part of things.

[CeeKay Boques]

Purlana, on 06 November 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

Game could be more fun.

Also: Where the hell is my community warfare!

But it could be LESS fun, and its not.


Hear hear community warfare, I want to see people argue about planetary bonuses and OP factions, not damage values.

[MrPenguin]

Technoviking, on 06 November 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

But it could be LESS fun, and its not.


Hear hear community warfare, I want to see people argue about planetary bonuses and OP factions, not damage values.

Clan Wolf not OP enough, if more timber wolfs aren't added then the game will fail!

[Darkmoose]

Technoviking, on 06 November 2012 - 10:11 AM, said:

This is madness. 10 seconds is an eternity in video game time. No kid would play this. Look at your watch for ten seconds, and snap, then try again. What are you doing for the other 9 seconds?

If you don't shoot all you weapons at once, chain fire, you can bring a decent barage of fire over 10 secs, unless all you have is one big gun, and never have to worry about overheating. If you cannot aim being able to alpha strike more often is not going to make a difference, and more than likely you will end up dead, because you overheat and are a stationary target for gauss rifles and everything else looking to kill you on the field. You still have to move, and it will still be possible with 3025 mechs to blow up. I think what they have done is fine, even the nerfed DHS, but maybe increase the recharge times a tad not 10 secs, but more than 2 secs for SPL or 4 for Gauss, for lasers just increase the time the weapon fires, for AC's a stream of fire like a machine gun, just longer ranges and more damage. For PPCs Missiles and Gauss maybe 5 or 6 secs.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Rifter, on 05 November 2012 - 07:59 PM, said:

The thing is they are BREAKING THE GAME with the changes lately to DHS, its getting to the point where this isnt mechwarrior anymore. Lets take a look at what they are doing with the heatsinks and use some examples and some very light math from mechs currently in game, this isnt even touching the clan mechs which are more reliant on double heatsinks and will be even more broken than the below example...


We have an awesome AWS-8Q, this is a first gen awesome that uses old tech with no tier two equipment, its the workhorse awesome from the IS. It has 3 PPC's as its main weponry and 28 SHS. This is an all around good mech, not expensive to run or buy or repair and packs a punch, with barely enough heatsinks but it is a workable design.

Then after tier two tech comes in they redesign this mech with tier two tech to combat the clans. They release the AWS-9M. They replace the standard PPC's with ER models and the standard heatsinks with doubles to combat the extra heat of the ER PPC's. It has 20 DHS so 40 SHS worth of cooling which is a substantial upgrade over the 28 SHS of the previous AWS-8Q model but this is NEEDED to cool the much hotter ER PPC's as well as the addition secondary weaponry this mech has. They also add a larger XL engine to boost speed while also reducing weight. This mech is Very expensive to buy and repair due to all the tier two tech and is a clear and definate upgrade over the older model, and you pay for this as its way more expensive to buy.

With the DHS nerfed down to 140% cooling, less than half their intended effectivness that puts the AWS-9M at 28 SHS worth of cooling, the exact same as the AWS-8Q. But remember its got ER PPC's so will run way hotter than the 8Q, like to the point of being useless in battle hotter. So what is supposed to be a clear and expensive upgrade over the 8Q turns out be much much more ineffective and boarderline useless to field. You are paying a huge premium for tier two tech that is WORSE than the tier one mech it is replacing.

When you start to break stock canon designs such as descibed above to the point where tier two tech is WORSE that tier one tech but still alot more expensive you are now in a place where you are just making a mockery of battletech and the lore involved and should stop using the BT/MW name.

If you want to make a big stompy robot game fine im ok with that, i like big stompy robots, but dont try and pawn this crap off as BT because it clearly is NOT in the direction this game has taken. Call it hawken, world of mechs, gundam robots online, whatever you want but dont abuse the BT/MW name like this if you are going to clearly step away from it to the point where stock designs are unplayable and worse than the designs they are supposed to be a upgrade from because you have broken the game mechanics to the point that makes them useless more expensive upgrades.

Just something to think about, and if you think that example is bad i can throw some clan deisngs in there that are alot more broken than that awesome example.

Your right on the money and why I have went back to playing World of Tanks until they figure out they are suppose to be ACTUALLY using an established IP that has certain attached expectations associated with it like well double heat sinks actually functioning as double heat sinks and Awesomes being able to use 3 PPCs effectively.

The IP has been around 27+ years. People who want to play a Mechwarrior/Battletech game want to play a Mechwarrior/Battletech game using all the established rules an precendents. This is why you actually use an established IP in the first place. PGI has seemed to forget this simple fact and has transitioned the game to be Robowars Online dba Mechwarrior Online. Basically game might have the title and the mechs and equipment might have the same name but since none of it functions the same, it sure the heck isn't Mechwarrior we are playing.

[MrPenguin]

Viktor Drake, on 06 November 2012 - 11:03 AM, said:

People who want to play a Mechwarrior/Battletech game want to play a Mechwarrior/Battletech game using all the established rules an precendents.

Yo, when did we elect Viktor Drake to represent all mechwarrior fans?

Edited by MrPenguin, 06 November 2012 - 11:05 AM.

[Krivvan]

Viktor Drake, on 06 November 2012 - 11:03 AM, said:

People who want to play a Mechwarrior/Battletech game want to play a Mechwarrior/Battletech game using all the established rules an precendents.

I've got no love for the rules from the TT or old games. I just like the universe and basic gameplay.

[wanderer]

Darkmoose, on 06 November 2012 - 09:59 AM, said:

I think the solution they use most closely matches the TT game, the thing that messes it up, is the increased fire rates of the weapons. If it takes 10 secs to sink 10 heat, 1 heat per sec, then small lasers will overheat your mech, under the table top rules, the small lasers took 10 sec to recharge so it balanced out, maybe the recharge times should be 10 secs. It may also get rid of double armor, armor was doubled because ROF increased.

Armor was doubled so people wouldn't just alpha-strike and one-shot opponents, especially lights.

Without double armor, a Gausscat could leg a Jenner in one shot and you could core most lights from the front in a single stroke. Nothin' like coming round a corner and BANG, is there?

Likewise, you don't want to set things to 10 sec intervals. Again, it encourages alpha strike-and-run. Pop up over hill. FIRE ALL THE THINGS. Go back behind hill. Repeat.

And I tend to agree with the fact that the one core thing that was TT, heat sinks just got slapped silly. SHS are fine, but apparently we have "Fear of a blackDHS Planet" playing on PGI's sound system.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Implying Mechwarrior has ever been a 100% faithful representation of Battletech.

Implying MWO has "Strayed" too far from it's roots.

You know what makes Mechwarrior...Mechwarrior? Giant Robots that look "close enough" to the source material, with weapons that are close enough to the source material, that function close enough to the source material.

Notice I never said "That are exactly" the source material.

Cry more about a game that would be totally broken in a real time environment.

[zorak ramone]

Technoviking, on 06 November 2012 - 09:15 AM, said:

Fellow TTer, pointing at a table of numbers and saying "There, I translated them" while having no concept of what makes a video game fun, or considering any of the ramifications of when and how often it is fun to fire, and when its fun to dodge, or anything that has to do with playing a fun action game on the computer is EXACTLY why we keep having these long discussions.

Actually, "people" like you making baseless assumptions and not even reading effort posts are the reason we keep having these disucssions.

I've never played CBT on a table at all. The only time I've played CBT is on Megamek. I played MW4 competivively (HRR/GDL/CB in UTS/NBT) for at least 5 years and I've played every last MW game before it. You're assumptions that I am a "fellow TTer" and that I have "no concept about what makes a video game fun" are completely false.

You didn't even look at the table I generated. If you did, you'd see that alot of those numbers are close to what we already have in MWO. In fact, the whole translation was with the assumption that we'd be using MWO's engine and weapons mechanics. You can't point to a single thing in there that proves your point about 'no fun' or whatever.

And before you say "its not balanced," two things: what's not balanced, and did you see the part where I said I already did the analysis on what is and isn't balanced (from the standpoint of a real-time computer game, in case you forgot already) and could post that if challenged.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Viktor Drake, on 06 November 2012 - 11:03 AM, said:

Your right on the money and why I have went back to playing World of Tanks until they figure out they are suppose to be ACTUALLY using an established IP that has certain attached expectations associated with it like well double heat sinks actually functioning as double heat sinks and Awesomes being able to use 3 PPCs effectively.

The IP has been around 27+ years. People who want to play a Mechwarrior/Battletech game want to play a Mechwarrior/Battletech game using all the established rules an precendents. This is why you actually use an established IP in the first place. PGI has seemed to forget this simple fact and has transitioned the game to be Robowars Online dba Mechwarrior Online. Basically game might have the title and the mechs and equipment might have the same name but since none of it functions the same, it sure the heck isn't Mechwarrior we are playing.

Let's see... They're using canon designs.. They're using canon weapons.

All that's changing is weapon and heat values. [and some updated art assets]

Are you seriously that asspained over this?

NO MECHWARRIOR GAME HAS EVER BEEN 100% FAITHFUL TO TABLETOP... and when it's tried... IT'S BEEN PATCHED FOR THE BETTER OF THE GAME. [IE Mechwarrior 3]

[CCC Dober]

Helmer, on 05 November 2012 - 08:10 PM, said:

...
Although I can respect the opinion that perhaps PGI has strayed too far from the TT values, I feel that almost every single change has been for the better. Things are still in a state of balancing and fluctuation. Adherence to the original TT rules is great, however, there comes a time when the TT fail in a First Person setting such as this.
The TT rules were very complex for a TT game, however, they represent , in some cases, abstract values and concepts that are not needed in a environment such as this. The rules do not scale well and must be adapted.
...

It's not the changes that are in question here, more the lack of them. Like tripled heat dissipation to match the tripled fire rate on average. Things have been scaled selectively and not in unison. You can't expect the game to work as intended like that. And that it takes legions of people to call PGI out on that BS and they have the nerve to outright deny the validity of these claims ... can you fault them for asking refunds?

I sure don't and if you have any sense of responsibility, you will forward this to the people that can turn this ship in the right direction before it hits the iceberg. Like it isn't enough indication that new people aren't jazzed with the experience of shutting down all day long ...

[Roland]

Quote

People who want to play a Mechwarrior/Battletech game...

Let me just stop you right there.

There is no such thing as a "Mechwarrior/Battletech" game.

There is Mechwarrior, and there is Battletech.

They are two separate things. They will never be the same thing.

[zorak ramone]

Aym, on 06 November 2012 - 10:09 AM, said:

Ok, that doesn't change ANY of Helmer's point that TT values made fast mechs with small lasers OP in a ridiculous way.

You can't just make claims like this and not back it up with an argument.

EDIT: acutally, let me destroy your argument:

Reposting the table:

Wpn______Dmg___Ht____Cool__Spt___DPS___HPS_____HS_____DHS____Ammo__PS/Tton__DPS/Tton-DHS___Range
SL_______1.2___0.2___2.00____X___0.60___0.10___1.00___0.50___0.00____0.400____0.600_______1
SPL______1.2___0.4___2.00____X___0.60___0.20___2.00___1.00___0.00____0.200____0.300_______1
MPL______3.6___1.2___3.00____X___1.20___0.40___4.00___2.00___0.00____0.200____0.300_______2
ML_______3.0___0.9___3.00____X___1.00___0.30___3.00___1.50___0.00____0.250____0.400_______3
LPL______9.0___4.5___5.00____X___1.80___0.90___9.00___4.50___0.00____0.113____0.157_______3
AC20____24.0___4.2___6.00____9___4.00___0.70___7.00___3.50___2.78____0.168____0.197_______3
SRM6_____9.6___1.6___4.00___42___2.40___0.40___4.00___2.00___0.89____0.304____0.407_______3
SRM4_____6.4___1.2___4.00___63___1.60___0.30___3.00___1.50___0.60____0.286____0.391_______3
SRM2_____3.2___0.8___4.00__125___0.80___0.20___2.00___1.00___0.30____0.242____0.348_______3
SSRM2____3.2___0.8___4.00__125___0.80___0.20___2.00___1.00___0.30____0.211____0.286_______3
LL_______8.0___4.0___5.00____X___1.60___0.80___8.00___4.00___0.00____0.123____0.178_______5
AC10____10.0___1.5___5.00___20___2.00___0.30___3.00___1.50___1.50____0.121____0.133_______5
ERLL_____9.6___7.2___6.00____X___1.60___1.20__12.00___6.00___0.00____0.094____0.145_______6
PPC_____12.0___6.0___6.00____X___2.00___1.00__10.00___5.00___0.00____0.118____0.167_______6
AC5______4.0___0.4___4.00___50___1.00___0.10___1.00___0.50___0.75____0.103____0.108_______6
LBX10___10.0___1.0___5.00___20___2.00___0.20___2.00___1.00___1.50____0.138____0.148_______6
UAC5_____4.0___0.4___2.00___50___2.00___0.20___2.00___1.00___1.50____0.160____0.174_______7
GR______24.0___0.8___8.00___10___3.00___0.10___1.00___0.50___1.88____0.168____0.173_______7
LRM20___24.0___3.6___6.00___10___4.00___0.60___6.00___3.00___2.50____0.216____0.258_______7
LRM15___18.0___3.0___6.00___14___3.00___0.50___5.00___2.50___1.79____0.218____0.266_______7
LRM10___12.0___2.4___6.00___20___2.00___0.40___4.00___2.00___1.25____0.195____0.242_______7
LRM5_____6.0___1.2___6.00___40___1.00___0.20___2.00___1.00___0.63____0.216____0.276_______7
ERPPC___16.0__12.0___8.00____X___2.00___1.50__15.00___7.50___0.00____0.091____0.138_______8
AC2______1.2___0.3___3.00__150___0.40___0.10___1.00___0.50___0.33____0.055____0.059_______8

A 6xML jenner would be doing 18 damage every three seconds with these stats. A Huncback 4P would be doing 27 damage every three seconds. That hardly seems overpowering, especially when you consider the HS needed to run, and beam duration. Also, its nothing compared to the kind of killing power that slower mediums/heavies and assaults could pack.

My guess (but we'll never know because we weren't allowed to test it) is that the devs started with CBT damage values and variable recycles, meaning the Jennery here would be putting out 30 damage per alpha (probably every 3 or 4 seconds) and the HBK would be putting out 45 damage per alpha (again, probably every 3 or 4 seconds). We also don't know what the netcode looked like back in their first builds, however if the early stages of beta (I was in the second round of closed beta) were any indication, it was probably pretty bad. Also, early in beta, projectile weapons were slow, and had no impact area, making them almost worthless (even the GR) apart from their stats.


EDIT 2: Also, as I said in my first post, CBT wasn't perfectly balanced, but its better than MWO is right now. I've already done the analyses to adjust CBT balance if you want to see them.

Edited by zorak ramone, 06 November 2012 - 11:37 AM.

[wanderer]

Jade Kitsune, on 06 November 2012 - 11:22 AM, said:

Cry more about a game that would be totally broken in a real time environment.

There has to be two opposing pulls on an MWO game.

One is making it feel like Battletech. If it doesn't, it's not "Mechwarrior", it's "Stompy Bots Online".

The other is in adjusting that without destroying the spirit of the game's premise. If you don't limit that, you end up with head-desk sounds coming as the players collectively find the nearest furnishing and contact it repeatedly with their skulls in frustration at the results of "balance"

DHS going to 1.4 falls squarely into the "too far" range, as it neatly savages half the weapons systems in favor of missiles and ballistics (and small lasers). I've always said changes to heat and damage are the most brutal and blunt alterations to the game, and this one is about as brutal as it gets.

[Riffleman]

Is anyone reading this thread honestly suprised by the mistakes pgi makes anymore? Seriously?

[MrPenguin]

Roland, on 06 November 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

Let me just stop you right there.

There is no such thing as a "Mechwarrior/Battletech" game.

There is Mechwarrior, and there is Battletech.

They are two separate things. They will never be the same thing.

Thank you!
Wish more people would realize this already...