310 replies to this topic

[Zelekin]

Azantia, on 18 May 2012 - 11:10 PM, said:

i broke it down as easy as it comes....let me see...

in my example, my net gain was 100 armor, your net gain was 250.
Since weapon damage values dont change, the damage for both of us stayed the same.

In the previous example : it would take you 2.5 turns to destroy me if it was pure armor vs damage output and no "hit locations" where it would take me 10 turns. Which is a difference of 7.5 turns

with double armor : 5 turns for you to win, 20 turns for me to win. Difference of 15 turns.

by doubling the armor values, you gain an additional 7.5 turns of survival against me, where as I only gained 2.5. Who gained more from doubling the armor values? Me in the light/medium or you in the heavy/assault?

Since Heavies and Assaults generally have "more weaponry" and "more base armor" they benefit more from doubling armor values because they can shred armor faster than mechs lighter than them, and have more "free armor" from being doubled to take the punishment that a lighter mech can deal in return. So people will lean towards heavies and assaults, just like in MW4.

But their are no turns. This is a mechwarrior game, not table top. And a straight up 1v1 thing is something that happens in honor trials and fiction. And their are factors like maneuverability and turn speed, a good light can kite the assault, to attempt to take less damage, all though with your proposed mech which gained 100 and mech which gained 250 I can't tell which in particular they may be.

Their will be other factors besides damage and armor, and while I suppose the nature of the OP has put us primarily on those topics, I feel others deserve consideration in relation to it.

EDIT: grammar

Edited by Zelekin, 18 May 2012 - 11:16 PM.

[Sassori]

Zelekin, on 18 May 2012 - 11:14 PM, said:

But their are no turns. This is a mechwarrior game, not table top. And a straight up 1v1 thing is something that happens in honor trials and fiction. And their is factors like maneuverability and turn speed, a good light can kite the assault, to attempt to take less damage, all though with your proposed mech which gained 100 and mech which gained 250 I can't tell which in particular they may be.

Their will be other factors besides damage and armor, and while I suppose the nature of the OP has put us primarily on those topics, I feel others deserve consideration in relation to it.

Normally I would agree with you, a good light /should/ kite a heavy, but not in the video's we've seen. Aiming is to fast, to easy, and to smooth for arm based weaponry. I like that it takes a moment for torso to catch up but arms are still to fast imho.

[Azantia]

when you get enough of that tonnage back, you can add additional weapons or armor using that free tonnage. Keep in mind that even though the overall armor is doubled, doesnt mean it matches the rate of free ammo, and once again it favors heavier mechs.

Example :
Gauss Rifle : TT : 15 Damage, 660 meter range, 8 shots per ton = net damage output per ton = 120 damage

If doubled the net damage per ton is 240 damage.

now compare the 120 bonus damage (for only 1 ton) to how much average armor is obtained from "doubling"

now compare the average that a light or medium mech receives compared to a heavy or assault.

see where I am going?

Edited by Azantia, 18 May 2012 - 11:22 PM.

[Zelekin]

Christopher Dayson, on 18 May 2012 - 11:16 PM, said:

Normally I would agree with you, a good light /should/ kite a heavy, but not in the video's we've seen. Aiming is to fast, to easy, and to smooth for arm based weaponry. I like that it takes a moment for torso to catch up but arms are still to fast imho.

Certainly, and like prior posters suggested, more sluggish aiming could be a solvent to this, all though I'm not sure that is a 100% cure.

In the end the question of TT armor vs game armor isn't one that can be solved by forum post I think.


My hopes are simple in the end: a balanced and fun game which has advanced beyond prior iterations.

Edited by Zelekin, 18 May 2012 - 11:19 PM.

[Gauge]

Christopher Dayson, on 18 May 2012 - 11:09 PM, said:

Twice as many hits to kill everything makes a MAJOR difference when you are trying to kill something before it gets in your back and erases you without a chance of you turning around and engaging it.

If a Cicada blitzes around without having to worry about getting vaped then it no longer behaves like a light mech. Light mechs are supposed to be fragile. An Atlas is supposed to be tough. Neither is supposed to take multiple PPC hits without caring.

But you'll have twice as much armor in the back, which will give twice as much time to figure out a way to get that little ****** into your crosshairs, or twice as much time for an ally to get their rear in gear and bail you out. After all, if the thing would be dead in TT for trying that, then you've probably gotten it down to half or lower health before it sneaks behind you.

[Zakatak]

Anybody else hoping to see Garth step in and clear some things up? That would be nice.

@Aza, why did you quote me there? I wasn't really directing anything at you.

Edited by Zakatak, 18 May 2012 - 11:19 PM.

[Azantia]

Zakatak, on 18 May 2012 - 11:18 PM, said:

Anybody else hoping to see Garth step in and clear some things up? That would be nice.

@Aza, why did you quote me there? I wasn't really directing anything at you.

And finally, we agree on something, eh?

Wrong quote...my bad

Edited by Azantia, 18 May 2012 - 11:21 PM.

[Gauge]

Azantia, on 18 May 2012 - 11:10 PM, said:

i broke it down as easy as it comes....let me see...

in my example, my net gain was 100 armor, your net gain was 250.
Since weapon damage values dont change, the damage for both of us stayed the same.

In the previous example : it would take you 2.5 turns to destroy me if it was pure armor vs damage output and no "hit locations" where it would take me 10 turns. Which is a difference of 7.5 turns

with double armor : 5 turns for you to win, 20 turns for me to win. Difference of 15 turns.

by doubling the armor values, you gain an additional 7.5 turns of survival against me, where as I only gained 2.5. Who gained more from doubling the armor values? Me in the light/medium or you in the heavy/assault?

Since Heavies and Assaults generally have "more weaponry" and "more base armor" they benefit more from doubling armor values because they can shred armor faster than mechs lighter than them, and have more "free armor" from being doubled to take the punishment that a lighter mech can deal in return. So people will lean towards heavies and assaults, just like in MW4.

Alright, we'll have to agree to disagree. You're right that the flat numbers are larger, which are the measurements you want to use, but they're exactly the same if we go by percentages, which is what I want to focus on. I feel like percentages better reflect what's actually going on.

[Azantia]

Zelekin, on 18 May 2012 - 11:14 PM, said:

But their are no turns. This is a mechwarrior game, not table top. And a straight up 1v1 thing is something that happens in honor trials and fiction. And their are factors like maneuverability and turn speed, a good light can kite the assault, to attempt to take less damage, all though with your proposed mech which gained 100 and mech which gained 250 I can't tell which in particular they may be.

Their will be other factors besides damage and armor, and while I suppose the nature of the OP has put us primarily on those topics, I feel others deserve consideration in relation to it.

EDIT: grammar

lets change it to damage per second then.

in the example
I have 100 armor and deal 25 damage per second
you have 250 armor and deal 40 damage per second
both are high damage values for TT and maybe not even obtainable, but this is just for the math.

You kill me in 2.5 seconds basically, I kill you in 10 seconds, difference of 7.5 seconds in your favor

Doubled armor value
200 armor for me, 25 damage per second
500 armor for you, 40 damage per second

you kill me in 5 seconds, i kill you in 20 seconds. difference of 15 seconds in your favor. You gained 7.5 seconds of additional time from the previous example.

gauge, on 18 May 2012 - 11:21 PM, said:

Alright, we'll have to agree to disagree. You're right that the flat numbers are larger, which are the measurements you want to use, but they're exactly the same if we go by percentages, which is what I want to focus on. I feel like percentages better reflect what's actually going on.

flat percentages do not reflect the net gain that a heavy or assault mech will receive when compared to a Light or Medium. I could do the percentages if you wanted.......might take me some time cause if im going to do it, im going to do it for EVERY weight class from 20 tons, by 5 tons up to 100 tons to show you....but I do work tomorrow, its late and im tired...maybe tomorrow.

in the very very very rough example above.
when we "doubled" our mech armor, we both received 100% bonus. But you actually received 150% more armor from that bonus than I did.....see how that works?

Edited by Azantia, 18 May 2012 - 11:30 PM.

[Spheroid]

If they buff the armor too much stock configurations for something like a Vindicator would be useless. No signficant damage at range.

If they are going to double armor and ammo they should increase weapon range as well.

[Sassori]

gauge, on 18 May 2012 - 11:18 PM, said:

But you'll have twice as much armor in the back, which will give twice as much time to figure out a way to get that little ****** into your crosshairs, or twice as much time for an ally to get their rear in gear and bail you out. After all, if the thing would be dead in TT for trying that, then you've probably gotten it down to half or lower health before it sneaks behind you.

Twice as much armor? Ok so I go from 8 rear armor to 16. You still get internal in one volley of 4 medium lasers. Same as you'd get internal in one volley of 4 medium lasers if I had only 8. This is just one example of how doubling the armor on everything impacts the game in negative fashion.

Say I am driving an Awesome, they are big, slow, heavy. Everyone knows this. My opponent is in a Jenner and trying to flank me. I turn as fast as I can and shoot! Because I am some kind of awesome I manage to hit with two torso mounted PPC's and an arm mounted PPC at the same time.

To bad the Jenner has so much armor it can now shrug off 3 ppc hits because they won't all hit in the same spot due to tracking time between the arms and torso and now it gets behind me and waste's me in one shot because I simply can't compensate for that kind of movement just from sheer kph difference.

Doubling Ammo doesn't fix this issue because the faster mech still survived a near suicidal charge and got to my back where I can't do anything.

The real issue is that either way the game stops feeling like MechWarrior/BattleTech, it turns into something else entirely and that's what we're resistant against.

Though Azantia is also right about face to face confrontations.

EDIT: Cuz I saw Atlas, and types it, instead of typing Awesome like I shoulda.

Edited by Christopher Dayson, 18 May 2012 - 11:27 PM.

[Zelekin]

Azantia, on 18 May 2012 - 11:25 PM, said:

lets change it to damage per second then.

in the example
I have 100 armor and deal 25 damage per second
you have 250 armor and deal 40 damage per second
both are high damage values for TT and maybe not even obtainable, but this is just for the math.

You kill me in 2.5 seconds basically, I kill you in 10 seconds, difference of 7.5 seconds in your favor

Doubled armor value
200 armor for me, 25 damage per second
500 armor for you, 40 damage per second

you kill me in 5 seconds, i kill you in 20 seconds. difference of 15 seconds in your favor. You gained 7.5 seconds of additional time from the previous example.

I certainly wasn't objecting to the math, I was objecting to the premise, there are other considerations besides just the armor and the damage.

In the end I meant to say that a "first person shooter" (loosely describing MWO) is RADICALLY different from a table top game. Sorry for not making that clear, and WILL require different balance to some extent. If not the armor it will be found elsewhere.

EDIT: grammar.

Edited by Zelekin, 18 May 2012 - 11:29 PM.

[Gauge]

Azantia, on 18 May 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

lets change it to damage per second then.

in the example
I have 100 armor and deal 25 damage per second
you have 250 armor and deal 40 damage per second
both are high damage values for TT and maybe not even obtainable, but this is just for the math.

You kill me in 2.5 seconds basically, I kill you in 10 seconds, difference of 7.5 seconds in your favor

Doubled armor value
200 armor for me, 25 damage per second
500 armor for you, 40 damage per second

you kill me in 5 seconds, i kill you in 20 seconds. difference of 15 seconds in your favor. You gained 7.5 seconds of additional time from the previous example.



flat percentages do not reflect the net gain that a heavy or assault mech will receive when compared to a Light or Medium. I could do the percentages if you wanted.......might take me some time cause if im going to do it, im going to do it for EVERY weight class from 20 tons, by 5 tons up to 100 tons to show you....but I do work tomorrow, its late and im tired...maybe tomorrow.

This example still shows a light mech that effectively can't win in either situation, and at the end of both simulations, it's destroyed an equal percentage of the assault's total armor.

I hope this doesn't make me sound like a jerk or anything, but I would honestly love to see something like that at some point. Let me know if it's something you've actually got the time to put together, or you see a post that does the job well, I'd love to read it.

[Azantia]

I was using a straight up fight in the above sense Gauge to highlight the advantage. In either case the Light mech pilot has to be "better" and avoid more fire and hit more often to win, in the above case.

example one : base values
the lighter mech would have to hit at least 3.01 times more often to "win" against the heavier mech.

in the second example : doubled values, hit 4.01 times more often to "win" against the heavier mech

Edited by Azantia, 18 May 2012 - 11:37 PM.

[Gauge]

Christopher Dayson, on 18 May 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

Twice as much armor? Ok so I go from 8 rear armor to 16. You still get internal in one volley of 4 medium lasers. Same as you'd get internal in one volley of 4 medium lasers if I had only 8. This is just one example of how doubling the armor on everything impacts the game in negative fashion.

Say I am driving an Awesome, they are big, slow, heavy. Everyone knows this. My opponent is in a Jenner and trying to flank me. I turn as fast as I can and shoot! Because I am some kind of awesome I manage to hit with two torso mounted PPC's and an arm mounted PPC at the same time.

To bad the Jenner has so much armor it can now shrug off 3 ppc hits because they won't all hit in the same spot due to tracking time between the arms and torso and now it gets behind me and waste's me in one shot because I simply can't compensate for that kind of movement just from sheer kph difference.

Doubling Ammo doesn't fix this issue because the faster mech still survived a near suicidal charge and got to my back where I can't do anything.

The real issue is that either way the game stops feeling like MechWarrior/BattleTech, it turns into something else entirely and that's what we're resistant against.

Though Azantia is also right about face to face confrontations.

EDIT: Cuz I saw Atlas, and types it, instead of typing Awesome like I shoulda.

Ahhh, I see, I had no idea that back armors were that low in tabletop. I see your point now. The only counter I can come up with is the classic 'Well, lasers are DoT, convergence', etc. I hope they Devs have puzzled over all the possible situations (which I clearly haven't XP ), and have it well in hand.

[Zelekin]

Its been a lively debate everyone, but i'm afraid i'm off for know, its rather late.

(simply to let you know why i'm not replying)

[Sassori]

gauge, on 18 May 2012 - 11:36 PM, said:

Ahhh, I see, I had no idea that back armors were that low in tabletop. I see your point now. The only counter I can come up with is the classic 'Well, lasers are DoT, convergence', etc. I hope they Devs have puzzled over all the possible situations (which I clearly haven't XP ), and have it well in hand.

Sure, but there's nothing stopping that Jenner from taking a bunch of machine guns for direct damage goodness. Also, Jenners lasers are in the arm, so convergence isn't a factor also.

[Zelekin]

Azantia, on 18 May 2012 - 11:36 PM, said:

I was using a straight up fight in the above sense Gauge to highlight the advantage. In either case the Light mech pilot has to be "better" and avoid more fire and hit more often to win, in the above case.

example one : base values
the lighter mech would have to hit at least 3.01 times more often to "win" against the heavier mech.

in the second example : doubled values, hit 4.01 times more often to "win" against the heavier mech

Well isn't that what it would be like, a light mech vs a more heavy mech in general,I mean, i'm not too familiar with lore, but If I recall early lighter mechs where the original ones, and heavier ones where introduced to "one up" them in a direct fight, all though they retain roles as scouts. But that's slightly off topic. All though I do see what you mean by having just armor buffed and damage being the same giving advantage to those with higher damage.

EDIT: dang, what happened to my original text. Anyway, it said that i'm off for now, its rather late.

Edited by Zelekin, 18 May 2012 - 11:41 PM.

[Gauge]

Azantia, on 18 May 2012 - 11:36 PM, said:

I was using a straight up fight in the above sense Gauge to highlight the advantage. In either case the Light mech pilot has to be "better" and avoid more fire and hit more often to win, in the above case.

example one : base values
the lighter mech would have to hit at least 3.01 times more often to "win" against the heavier mech.

in the second example : doubled values, hit 4.01 times more often to "win" against the heavier mech

Ah ha! I do see what you mean by that! Though I think it also moves into territory where we are trying to equate the luck of dice rolls in the TT to player skill in MWO, which is tougher to math out.

In my mind though, that just shows that superior tactics are important to MWO, as you are less likely to 'just get lucky' and succeed.
But that all is just a matter of opinion, not math. Thank you for putting up with me until I understood though, I really do appreciate it.

[Sassori]

Actually I think the Mackie was one of the first Battlemechs and it was a big boy. I could totally be wrong though on that one. I just know a lot of the prototypes to the heavies were still heavy as heck.