949 replies to this topic

[eZZip]

Buddahcjcc, on 30 May 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

I still dont get how something you can only use one or two times is an instant "I WIN" button, guess thats cause I never use massivly lasered out mechs that rely on it. I tend to be the one in the Solaris 7 medium matches who put an LB20X AC and a LB10XAC with enough ammo on it and own everyone else and never care about heat.

Clearly you don't understand that, ton for ton, energy weapons do the most damage. The problem with energy-heavyl oadouts is that to handle heat sufficiently, the heat sinks + weapons weigh about as much as ballstic weapons + ammunition. However, when you make it so that you don't need the heat sinks temporarily, everybody can just pile on the energy weapons, one-shot an enemy, flush, one-shot another enemy, and then shut down. This is far superior to being able to do damage throughout the game, since anybody with such a loadout would get destroyed easily and quickly by somebody who can magically whisk away the extreme heat buildups that are the drawback of their design.

[Ian]

Actually I worry about the viability of any ammo based weapon in this game. The developers have said they are multiplying base armor by 2 or 3. If so then ammo based weapons should have their ammo load multiplied by the same factor. So they have the same inherent balance. Let me explain what i'm thinking. Say one mech loads an AC 20 and two tons of ammo. It does 20 pts of damage for 10 turns. Another mech loads 4 medium lasers and 12 heat sinks for the same tonnage. It also does 20 pts of damage, only it does that 20 damage until its destroyed. On the TT games rarely last longer than 10 or 12 turns. However multiply armor by 3, and games should last 3 times as long. Meaning your 10 rounds of ammunition will be out in the first third of the game. Add in the fact that ML appear in the videos to all strike the same location negating the other reason to take the large autocannon and its starting to look like laser weaponry is far better in MWO than ballistic.

[Volthorne]

Buddahcjcc, on 30 May 2012 - 01:45 PM, said:

There are mechs in the books DESIGNED to "run hot" as I remember there being some rule about that.
Should we not have access to those either?

Mind you I havent had a book in my hands in 20 years

Yeah, there are. They don't have coolant flushes for when they **** up because they swapped out heatsinks for more weaponry, though.

Coolant flushes make an "I WIN" button because you remove the only balancing factor, giving you pretty much a free alpha strike, or a second chance when you don't deserve one, because you ****** up.

Edited by Volthorne, 30 May 2012 - 01:55 PM.

[Dracma]

Phoenixfire, on 26 May 2012 - 05:06 AM, said:

Maps that are all similar, I want some variety in my maps and in MW4 it seemed all the maps were pretty much flat arenas with little to no cover

I agree. I hope there are more opportunities for elevation and maneuvering. Give me rivers, valleys, forests and rock formations to keep things interesting.

[Kenyon Burguess]

what i dont want in the game are people who dont understand that MWO = mech warrior ONLINE. that means its a game that is constantly in a state of build. if something is wrong dont get your panties in a twist and rage on a forum. send a polite letter to the devs, with screenies if possible, about what is wrong and how it can be fixed. fixes come faster to the public if everyone works together towards the goal rather than dropping rage bomb rants on forums.

[Dracma]

Natedog, on 29 May 2012 - 12:29 PM, said:

An easy way to fix having too many of the same mech, or the most popular mech, is having a "supply and demand" feature built into the game. There really should only be a finite amount of mechs available in the game to simulate manufacturing capabilities (along with weapons, munitions, etc..) and it would also be nice if there was some sort of auction house where houses/merc units can pick up used equipment from units that don't need it anymore.

I'm with you there. Scarcity will ensure the game continues to be balanced.. Also, the whole arguement for Battle Value for bouts, or Tonnage limits will make sure each fight stays more balanced.

[Lightdragon]

Buddahcjcc, on 30 May 2012 - 01:45 PM, said:

There are mechs in the books DESIGNED to "run hot" as I remember there being some rule about that.
Should we not have access to those either?

Mind you I havent had a book in my hands in 20 years

ah yes... youre talking about triple strength myomer, running hot makes the tsm muscles increase your mechs strength making it run faster and hit harder in melee combat

[Volthorne]

Buddahcjcc, on 30 May 2012 - 02:20 PM, said:

So you have even an issue with coolant pods then cause theyre an I win button?
Cause if youll notice thats what IM talking about
Not some magical amount of infinite coolant that you keep talking about

Cause up there you say pods are cool as long as they debilitate your mech in a way they never did in the game -.-
Which imo is kinda stupid.

They have battlemechs powered by fusion reactors but science from a thousand plus years ago should still be the norm as far as the heat goes.

No, coolant pods make sense. They have downsides (read: they can be exploded and they **** up your coolant system when used - it's even in the ******* description on Sarna). Random built-in "Coolant Flushes" that don't have a downside (read: can't be exploded and don't harm your 'mech in any way) are bullshit.

Also: cold-fusion reactors.

Edited by Volthorne, 30 May 2012 - 02:54 PM.

[Tannhauser Gate]

Hackers and exploit abusers.

Dude, Im -all- for maxing your PC hardware for max fps, using every nuance of a variant in the Mechlab to get the most performance, and using comms, skype, or shared tactical maps.. whatever..

but if you alter the game, change the code, manipulate your packets, use trainers, aim bots, esp bots, or otherwise change the rules of the sim that we ALL play under then you are destroying the game. If you find a hack or an exploit, report it and report eveyone using it. I know there are alot of grey hats out there. Solve the problem, dont be part of it.

Edited by LakeDaemon, 30 May 2012 - 03:14 PM.

[Lycan]

RainbowToh, on 29 May 2012 - 01:37 AM, said:

dude it is not about whether it is realistic or whatever that NASA does. It is that having coolant flush is a huge tactical advantage.

Scenario:

Spams energy weapons, mech overheating, shutting down. Flush coolant, annoying warning goes away, spams energy weapons some more.

If you really want coolant flush, i suggest limit it to single use or at most twice, only to be used in a do or die moment.

Except, as pointed out, Coolant Pods take up space and weight which requires you to give up something else if you want to mount them.

Also, they're "one use only" so if you have 2 of them you only get to use the "coolant flush" twice.

Oh, and the explode when hit.

From my understanding, MW4's version of a coolant flush was actually venting the 'Mech's coolant. (Not really sure how that was actually suppose to cool the mech down more but, eh, I'm not a tech/mechanic guy).

Angelicon, on 29 May 2012 - 06:56 AM, said:

IS XL engines that kill your mech when your side torso dies. I think this is a horrible mechanic to move into MWO and it will make IS high tech mechs too vulnerable vs clan mechs.

While IS Mechs are already extremely vulnerable to the higher Tech base of the Clans, removing the inherent issue with the IS version of the XL just doesn't seem right.

Not that I'll get all bent out of shape if they decide to do so, just that I don't think it should be done.

Kalyko Jak, on 29 May 2012 - 08:19 AM, said:

I dont want the developers to forget about having fun. This is a game, not a religion. Just because there was some kind of rule in a 1980's table top game that does not obligate the dev's to include it here. Make your decisions based on what's going to allow the most players to have the most fun.

Unfortunately, the developers don't agree with you as they have said (and it's been repeatedly quoted) that there are going to be sticking as close to that "1980's table top game" as possible.

From what I've read, they'll only change a rule if it doesn't make sense (ala the minimum range for the AC2/5's).

Edited by Lycan, 30 May 2012 - 03:43 PM.

[Badfinger]

No Trading... No matter if it's your friend or your ALT. Every account needs to earn it's own way to the Top.

[Valron]

the only way trading makes any sense is for loot, but given that weapons are all pretty standard affairs(we are still pre-clan, ER lasers(i think)) there would be no point to trades except for higher levels to boost lower levels.

Then again earning your way to the top nets you first hand experience in piloting your mech, knowing turn radiuses, torso speeds, and various other handling characteristics . This should give you a edge over someone who just got gifted a fully decked out mech. I am still against it, but it wouldnt be game breaking.

[TWolfWD]

It's already been said. If I join a game and all anybody's doing is playing assault, the game has failed. That is, I do NOT want to see a game in which there's no point trying to play light and medium Mechs

[Rummy Kegstealer]

Lord Perversor, on 26 May 2012 - 05:17 AM, said:

Don't think suicide scout is as much viable here, since long range weapons like lrm have 650m range

LRM's only have 650m range that's less then the other games.

[Volthorne]

Badfinger, on 30 May 2012 - 03:50 PM, said:

No Trading... No matter if it's your friend or your ALT. Every account needs to earn it's own way to the Top.

Valron, on 30 May 2012 - 03:57 PM, said:

the only way trading makes any sense is for loot, but given that weapons are all pretty standard affairs(we are still pre-clan, ER lasers(i think)) there would be no point to trades except for higher levels to boost lower levels.

Then again earning your way to the top nets you first hand experience in piloting your mech, knowing turn radiuses, torso speeds, and various other handling characteristics . This should give you a edge over someone who just got gifted a fully decked out mech. I am still against it, but it wouldnt be game breaking.

Trading has been confirmed as not included. Can you please maybe go read the Dev Blogs and Q&A sessions?

[KBone]

hacked mechs... I remember the days where you'd get picked off by some ****-*** with a Dire Wolf equipped with numerous gauss rifles in the head standing on the far side of the map... totally blew the entire experience...

[kelmar6821]

Anime influenced mech designs

[Your Worst Nightmare]

Overpowered weapons, or weapon loadouts, like dual AC 20s and dual large lasers on a relatively maneuverable mech, like boosting an atlases speed and taking out everything but 2 lasers and a adding another ac20. Plus all mechs being "omnimechs," those are after the clan war

Edited by Your Worst Nightmare, 30 May 2012 - 04:22 PM.

[Lahzarus]

"gold farmers/sellers"

[AWarrior]

lack of battle types, only team/solo deathmacth wont be enough. The all the same maps, and too small maps flooded with stuff, they look senceless.
Completely casual gameplay, whcih comes again and again ruining the bases of cybersport, and spoiling the taste of real voctories.
Clear vision of weapon purpose making no real fun in customization, same weapons can be used in many different situations, making them more or less effective, but not usable non usable, lasers range for examble - having maximum firing range is not really sencible optimal friring range would be great.
many copies of the same mech chassis in one battle, its not the war of clones.