339 replies to this topic

[Joe Mallad]

Belisarius†, on 10 May 2012 - 04:42 PM, said:

So... cloning tabletop values (which the creators of the tabletop game have explicitly stated were designed to simply keep the board small enough to be used in a living room) into a completely different medium automatically makes for a "thinking man's game"?

I'm glad I don't live on whatever planet you come from.

I'm also very glad to see at least some people are realising how crippling this will be to tactical play.

ok... not arguing or disrespecting but can you then explain to me what you believe this game should be like so it becomes a tactical game? Genuinely asking...

[Cobweb]

neodym, on 10 May 2012 - 01:12 PM, said:

I totally disagree with OP,tabletop is tabletop and pc game is pc game........ I was shooting LRM at 1000meters all those years in MW2,MW3 and MW4

I am dissapointed that LRM cant be fired without lock on,under 200meters with max range of 640 meters witch is more than 33% decrease from previous games with bad accurancy,ammo problems and not impressive damage

like I am dissapointed,yeah funk me who I am just little no one but its like that and thats the way it is,MW3 nailed it.... the weapons behaviour,dmg,visuals,feel were spot on,maybe I was too optimistic that someone can 14 years later stand up to that standard...

You are a funny joke maker, keep up the lols.

[The Cheese]

Mike Silva, on 10 May 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:

I think most of us accept this. But to ask right up front that LRM ranges be increased by 50% to 100% is just ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous at all. MW fans wanting the range to be what they're used to is no different from a TT player saying that it should stick to what they're used to.

What's ridiculous is saying what will or will not be appropriate without having tried it out first.

[Joe Mallad]

Mike Silva, on 10 May 2012 - 04:45 PM, said:

From watching videos the main thing I don't like about LRMs is that it looks like they never miss, but maybe I'm not seeing exactly how they work. It seems like it doesn't take much, or even line of sight to get a lock. But I also don't understand how the "spotting" mechanics are going to be put to work.

watch the vids and when they use LRMs, watch the mech counter at the top of the scream, there are many times you see the enemy mech light up all over from succesful hits but other times, there are very few hits. There is in one vid where he tries to fire LRM over a tree line at an enemy but clearly did not have line of sight and or there was not a scout spotting for him and the enemy mech's counter never lit up. So he obviously missed with everything. LRMs are being used just as they would have been used in table top. If you have clear line of sight, chances are youre going to hit with just about everything. If a scout is doing hit job, then you can used the indirect line of sight rule and get the bonus to fire without having to see the enemy yourself. NOW... once advanced targeting systems come into play, watch how many missile users will than praise and rejoice. Also keep in mind that in your older MW games, most people that used and relied on missiles probably did not take into account that STREAK tech makes using missiles a whole lot easier. Almost everything after the clans came was based on streak tech. A Streak LRM 20 pack was devastating to use as at max range (if you could get a lock) you could fire and forget and they would find their mark with no other guidance and their max range is 840 meters.

[Mike Silva]

The Cheese, on 10 May 2012 - 05:14 PM, said:

It's not ridiculous at all. MW fans wanting the range to be what they're used to is no different from a TT player saying that it should stick to what they're used to.

What's ridiculous is saying what will or will not be appropriate without having tried it out first.

Sorry, it's completely ridiculous. There are a lot of things in this world that I haven't tried that I know won't work, it doesn't mean that I should try them to confirm that they're a bad idea.

[Joe Mallad]

The Cheese, on 10 May 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

You lost me at "lol".

Also, this thinly veiled MW vs TT thread should be closed. We all know that they're not the same thing, no matter how closely the numbers match up. The games are two completely different things, even if they are based in the same universe.

There will be balancing performed on the numbers as the game is tested by players. What appears to be too short of a range now may very well be lengthened if it turns out that it really is inadequate, or the converse may happen. Weapons may have their stats changed, jump jet physics may be modified, water's heat dispersal properties may be increased or decreased, etc, etc. These things happen to give us the best gaming experience possible. I am not pro-TT or pro-MW. I am pro-fun. I applaud the fact that the devs are trying to keep to the base material and hope they can do it well, but we've all got to accept that some of those figures just won't work well with a simulation.

Point is, quit your damn whinging. The die hard TT fanatics are just as bad as the die hard MW fanatics. The devs will never make everyone happy, so they will build the game around a good mech combat experience. Accept that and enjoy the game.

if you want your LRMs or energy based weapons to reach out at longer ranges... than use ER weapons or STREAK missiles or other advanced missile systems.

[The Cheese]

Mike Silva, on 10 May 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

Sorry, it's completely ridiculous. There are a lot of things in this world that I haven't tried that I know won't work, it doesn't mean that I should try them to confirm that they're a bad idea.

I'm not arguing that there are some things in life that just won't work. Of course there are. What we're talking about here isn't one of those things.
640m can work just like 1km can. You just use the weapon differently. This is TT fans disagreeing with MW fans. Simple as that.

Yoseful Mallad, on 10 May 2012 - 05:19 PM, said:

if you want your LRMs or energy based weapons to reach out at longer ranges... than use ER weapons or STREAK missiles or other advanced missile systems.

The point.
------------
your head.

[Mike Silva]

The Cheese, on 10 May 2012 - 05:21 PM, said:

I'm not arguing that there are some things in life that just won't work. Of course there are. What we're talking about here isn't one of those things.
640m can work just like 1km can. You just use the weapon differently. This is TT fans disagreeing with MW fans. Simple as that.

Yes, 1km would work, it would be GREAT for the missile system lovers..... and not so good for everybody else. Being divisive and trying to draw lines by separate the "TT fans" from the "MW fans" is annoying.

[William Petersen]

Yoseful Mallad, on 10 May 2012 - 05:19 PM, said:

if you want your LRMs or energy based weapons to reach out at longer ranges... than use ER weapons or STREAK missiles or other advanced missile systems.

Edited by William Petersen, 10 May 2012 - 05:27 PM.

[Joe Mallad]

all im getting at is for those that say long range isnt long enough... you cant honestly say you KNOW it is not long enough when you havent even played the game yet. And then what? What if once the game starts and your wanting of longer ranges is instituted and you are on the other end of missile after missile barrage from who knows where? Then it will be... "I cant play this game and cant even last when im getting pounded into the ground from someone that I cant even see, let alone get close enough to." (in my opinion) having the ranges as is, will give the long range players just enough room to use ranged tactics without being untouchable... while giving those who are being targeted, a chance to maneuver or in this case out maneuver their ranged proponents so they too can still be able to hunt down their ranged attackers.

[The Cheese]

Mike Silva, on 10 May 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

Yes, 1km would work, it would be GREAT for the missile system lovers..... and not so good for everybody else. Being divisive and trying to draw lines by separate the "TT fans" from the "MW fans" is annoying.

Ok, so at least you partially get what I'm saying. This isn't TT any more than it is a previous MW game. The numbers don't have to match either of them to make this game fun. If everyone can just accept that, then there won't have to be a division between TT and MW fans, because as you said, that it just annoying.

[Dymlos2003]

Garth Erlam, on 10 May 2012 - 02:12 PM, said:

Max range of the LRM in Mech3 was 800 metres.

It was 640 meters in mech 2 as well

[Mike Silva]

The Cheese, on 10 May 2012 - 05:28 PM, said:

Ok, so at least you partially get what I'm saying. This isn't TT any more than it is a previous MW game. The numbers don't have to match either of them to make this game fun. If everyone can just accept that, then there won't have to be a division between TT and MW fans, because as you said, that it just annoying.

I *entirely* get what you're saying. I agree with you up to the point that minor tweaks to enhance play balance would be fine and great. I entirely disagree with you on the point that they should make drastic changes like doubling the range of certain weapons. At that point we may as well rename the game to BattleBots because it no longer maintains anything resembling the balance of the original game.

This isn't "TT versus MW" (whatever that means), this is people who want to see the game remain faithful to the original and those who want to see it changed to their liking.

[William Petersen]

dymlos2003, on 10 May 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

It was 640 meters in mech 2 as well

How sure are you about this? I don't have the game installed any more, and I know there was a chart in-game that listed *all* weapon data, but I cannot, for the life of me, find a screen shot of it. X_X

[Joe Mallad]

And yes there are those who are TT fans and those who are MW video game fans. Im not saying im a TT fan because I support the rules in this game being taken from TT. I too am a MW video game fan. I am a EVERYTHING BT/MW fan. I loved the video games for the look and the feel of being able to pilot a massive war machine but I love TT for the tactical side of play. To have both merged into one game is just pure heaven to me. Im sure I will love this game for what it is or will be. I just think its silly of all the belly aching over ranges of weapons that none of us have gotten to see just how effective or ineffective they will or will not be.


And while Im at it... IF I have offended anyone here for any reason, Ill apologize now as it was not or is not my intention what so ever.

Edited by Yoseful Mallad, 10 May 2012 - 05:43 PM.

[Lothahnus]

630 meters for a LRM is kinda stupid. This is future tech and you telling me the best they can do is 630 meters? We have tech today where we can shoot missle miles and mile acurately with satalite guidance. and you telling me in 2000 years it will only get worse?

Also saying there is no skill to sniping means you are not skilled at it. Sniping takes timing, aim, and dexterity. there is no reason it should not remain in the game. And sniping is not without risk. It is not hard to get behind a sniper or sneak up on them. If the sniper does not have proper cover or backup then its a good chance he will be toast.

People always get mad at snipers or people who use cover like we are supposed to run out in the open and be a target. taking long range out of the game makes every fight a brawl and though I like a good brawl if you make it all that is available it will get tiring.

[The Cheese]

Mike Silva, on 10 May 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

I *entirely* get what you're saying. I agree with you up to the point that minor tweaks to enhance play balance would be fine and great. I entirely disagree with you on the point that they should make drastic changes like doubling the range of certain weapons. At that point we may as well rename the game to BattleBots because it no longer maintains anything resembling the balance of the original game.

I never once said that any drastic changes should be made. I just said that I don't think that drastic changes are a ridiculous idea if they make the game more fun.

Mike Silva, on 10 May 2012 - 05:33 PM, said:

This isn't "TT versus MW" (whatever that means), this is people who want to see the game remain faithful to the original and those who want to see it changed to their liking.

Do you really not understand that those are the same thing? TT (tabletop) faithfuls want it kept to the original material. MW (Mechwarrior) faithfuls want it to play like the other MW games.

[Mike Silva]

The Cheese, on 10 May 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

Do you really not understand that those are the same thing? TT (tabletop) faithfuls want it kept to the original material. MW (Mechwarrior) faithfuls want it to play like the other MW games.

You mean like this Mechwarrior game?



"MechWarrior" is not synonymous with "video game."

[Coralld]

Lothahnus, on 10 May 2012 - 05:38 PM, said:

630 meters for a LRM is kinda stupid. This is future tech and you telling me the best they can do is 630 meters? We have tech today where we can shoot missle miles and mile acurately with satalite guidance. and you telling me in 2000 years it will only get worse?

Also saying there is no skill to sniping means you are not skilled at it. Sniping takes timing, aim, and dexterity. there is no reason it should not remain in the game. And sniping is not without risk. It is not hard to get behind a sniper or sneak up on them. If the sniper does not have proper cover or backup then its a good chance he will be toast.

People always get mad at snipers or people who use cover like we are supposed to run out in the open and be a target. taking long range out of the game makes every fight a brawl and though I like a good brawl if you make it all that is available it will get tiring.

I don't mean to sound insulting or anything like that but have you played MW4M? If not then please do so for a few hours and you will notice EVERYONE using Heavies and Assaults nearly all the time and neglecting over 50% of the other chassis simply because they can't fit two PPCs and two Gauss rifles or a crap ton of LRMs. The game is just ruled by snipe fest after snipe fest and LRM storming.

Now before people jump down my throat, please know that I have not played TT, I have seen and watched it but never got involved. I am looking forward to a MW game that doesn't involve mindless snipe fests and missile spamming and it looks like MWO will finely be the one to deliver what my self and many other people want, which is having all weapons and mechs viable. If the ranges need to be adjusted then the Devs may do so. We will find out during beta at the soonest.

[The Cheese]

Mike Silva, on 10 May 2012 - 05:45 PM, said:

You mean like this Mechwarrior game?



"MechWarrior" is not synonymous with "video game."

Being a little pedantic, aren't we? Mechwarrior, that may be, but you know as well as I do that this is not what people are commonly referring to when they say "Mechwarrior fan" on here.