147 replies to this topic

[Josef Nader]

The weapons are fine on every other chassis. Nobody complains about the AC20 in the Hunchback or the Atlas. Nobody whines about the SRMs in the Centurion or Stalker.

It's a problem with the Cat chassis, not the weapons. Weapon balance is fine.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Josef Nader, on 11 February 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

The weapons are fine on every other chassis. Nobody complains about the AC20 in the Hunchback or the Atlas. Nobody whines about the SRMs in the Centurion or Stalker.

It's a problem with the Cat chassis, not the weapons. Weapon balance is fine.

I disagree with this fundamentally.

Catapults magnify weapon imbalance. But the imbalance still exists without them. Like I said, it seems silly that Centurion would boat 3 SRM 6's and 2 MLas. But it's probably the most effective Centurion build at this point.

LRM's in the total absence of ECM are still pretty damn powerful and borderline overpowered. Especially if they do start adding larger maps.

Streak SRM's when mixed with ECM can definitely be classified as overpowered, and in the absence of ECM are much to efficient.

MG's and Flamers are useless.

ER Large Laser should probably still be looked at.

MPulse and SmPulse are pretty meh.

LBX-10's are terrible.

AC/10's probably need some help too.

Weapon balance needs tweaking.

It's not totally crazy (unless you are boating heavily), but it needs to be looked at.

[Mackman]

HRR Insanity, on 11 February 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

I would phrase it differently... my 'Mech can definitely converge one weapon perfectly. When I'm firing groups of weapons, sometimes my 'Mech can't pull it off because of limitations of the universe that my 'Mech lives in.

If you would read my original linked post on how to fix the problem, you would see I completely agree. Which is why, in that proposal, individually fired weapons would be pin-point accurate. The only time weapon spread would come into play would be when you fired in groups or multiple weapons in close succession (to prevent macroed avoidance of the group fire penalty).

Thus, you can have individually powerful weapons without running into the problem you're seeing here with the Catapults... or all of the other 'Mechs which run multiples of weapons to group damage.

I apologize for grouping you with the people who can't stand being able to actually aim weapons. I would actually be totally fine with your solution, with a few tweaks:

• It seems as though this would need to have some sort of scale of disruption. It simply doesn't make sense to have small lasers fired together absolutely mess up the aim of a multi-ton behemoth.
  
• 
  
• It seems, since a stock K-2 is designed to have two PPC's, and to fire them simultaneously, that some amount of simultaneous firing should be acceptable? Perhaps it would be by location or even by whatever side of the mech the weapon is on? (firing two lasers both from right arm/torso causes dispersion, but firing one each from right and left torso/arm does not)
  
• 
  
• Finally, how would this stop boating?I know this wouldn't greatly impact my 4-PPC Stalker build, aside from the fact I could no longer blow components off of cocky lights with one Alpha. It seems that this would make it harder to get pinpoint damage on one spot... but the best way to do so would still be to boat particular weapons.

Thoughts, especially on my last point?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Not that you were askin me...but...

I think stopping boating happens with larger maps and real objectives.

Then these imbalances don't show up as much in that situation.

And then you can make minor tweaks to the weapon systems to fix things.

Unless you fundamentally change the hardpoint system, I don't think you can fix boating on a mech level.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 11 February 2013 - 12:34 PM.

[Turist0AT]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 11 February 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

How about

1. See Catapult

2A. Fail to target due to ECM
2B. Target

3A. Fail to target due to ECM
3B. Lose target when drops behind cover

4. Assume it's a Splatcat, because if it wasn't it would've shot you already

5. Hope you are in Caustic because otherwise that Splatcat is moving 80 KPH and has a whole lot of cover to use to get to you

6. When it pops out, hope your team is organized enough to focus fire it, and that there is only one of them.

7. If you fail at above, prepare to lose.



Thanks for explaining your logic and adding to the conversation Mr. 7 posts!

My logic is that i dont see any problems. And i dont need to add to the coversation, ive stated my opinion. So when ppl read this theyll know that not everyone agress with OP, Mr 168 posts!

[StalaggtIKE]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 11 February 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

How about

1. See Catapult

2A. Fail to target due to ECM
2B. Target

3A. Fail to target due to ECM
3B. Lose target when drops behind cover

4. Assume it's a Splatcat, because if it wasn't it would've shot you already

5. Hope you are in Caustic because otherwise that Splatcat is moving 80 KPH and has a whole lot of cover to use to get to you

6. When it pops out, hope your team is organized enough to focus fire it, and that there is only one of them.

7. If you fail at above, prepare to lose.

BINGO! I'm glad someone caught on. I get tired of always being "that guy" that posts this.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 11 February 2013 - 12:51 PM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I just don't think it's that complicated. People just want to have the ability to play that overpowered mech and stomp on the people who refuse to follow suit.

I wish it was as simple as "Target Catapult, kill catapult before it gets within 270m", but that is NOT practical in the actual game.

It's also a vacuum statement as well.

If it was Solaris and all you had to worry about was the Catapult that's fine.

But when you are fighting 8 mechs, and they have their assaults pop out at long range, you are going to take shots at them. Most people won't notice that Catapult sneaking up while you take pot shots, and if it's within 500m before you notice it, it is WAY too late.

[WildeKarde]

The issue is simply the number of SRM's that can easily be fired and the fact it can seriously cripple a lot of mechs in a volley. The maps don't help as quite often you might be in range of them before they are on your screen so you can't plan tactics a lot of the time. As has been said they are fast enough to stop a lot of mech getting out of their range or avoiding their fire.

It's been said they aren't an issue but they are the equivalent to being hit by four AC20's or six gauss, really puts a negative to your day

Bigger maps will jus shift the mech. The uproar about twin gauss would be back in force if we had big open maps instead of the short maps we have.

The question is should weapons from different locations converge as much, or even should multiple weapons have a variation on where they hit?

[Josef Nader]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 11 February 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

I disagree with this fundamentally.

Catapults magnify weapon imbalance. But the imbalance still exists without them. Like I said, it seems silly that Centurion would boat 3 SRM 6's and 2 MLas. But it's probably the most effective Centurion build at this point.

It's the most effective Centurion build because of the maps, honestly. If you gave me a tight urban brawl in Tabletop, I'd take a Splaturion over a Stockturion any day. It's fast, and in close quarters in can hammer enemies at the cost of being nearly helpless at range. For the maps we have, that works. I feel when bigger maps are introduced, it won't.

The problem with Cats is that they're still just a few shades too good compared to rival heavies. Example:

Catapult
Pros: Great hardpoints, excellent side torso hitboxes, jump-capable on most variants, speed, largest torso twist of any chassis in the game, excellent gun placement (the cat exposes less of itself while firing over hills, for example), relatively fast, best boat in the game.
Cons: Huge head hitbox, hated by everyone, so usually primary target, no side motion on arms (nullified by massive torso twist).

Cataphract
Pros: Great mix of hardpoints on a well balanced chassis. Can be fast. One variant has jump jets. Better all-rounder than the Cat.
Cons: Poor weapon placement (anything in your arms is going to duff if you aren't careful. You have to expose yourself more completely to fire on enemies), large torso hitboxes that soak fire, goofy arm convergence (admittedly a problem with the game, but still). Limited torso twist and really poor arm rotation.

Dragon:
Pros: Fast. Great harasser with a solid mix of weapons.
Cons: Not a very hard hitter for it's weight class. Massive Buick hood is a magnet for bullets. Goofy hardpoint placement makes it hard to pack serious firepower onto the mech without cutting too deeply into it's speed.

That's what I'm trying to get at here. Dragons and Cataphracts are balanced by a healthy mix of pros and cons. The Catapult's con's column is a little too short for it to be interesting.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 11 February 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

LRM's in the total absence of ECM are still pretty damn powerful and borderline overpowered. Especially if they do start adding larger maps.

One one hand, LRMs are some of the worst weapons in the game. You have several seconds to get out of the line of fire, they're very easy to see incoming, and it's trivial to duff them on the terrain. You get a huge flashing alarm in your cockpit when LRMs are incoming, and you even get a verbal warning to get to cover from Betty.

On the other hand, getting caught in the open by an LRM barrage is a fast track to a bad time. LRMs will peel your mech like a banana if you can't get to cover.

Back to the other hand, if you can get within 180m of the LRM launcher, his LRMs are fancy fireworks.

I think LRMs are in quite a nice place, honestly. They're scary fire support, but they're easy enough to dodge and get around if you're observant and diligent.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 11 February 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

Streak SRM's when mixed with ECM can definitely be classified as overpowered, and in the absence of ECM are much to efficient.

Streaks have always been potent. I agree that the Streak/ECM combo is too good. The simple fix is to have the mech broadcasting the ECM affected by the ECM just as if he was an enemy mech. All the interference makes him sensor blind and prevents missile locks while it's on, but it also cloaks him from radar and makes it impossible for others to get a lock on him.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 11 February 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

MG's and Flamers are useless.

In lieu of soft targets, they always will be. They never have been used for anything beyond dealing with unarmored vehicles, infantry, and the like. They aren't battlemech killers, but they will make short work of non-mech targets.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 11 February 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

ER Large Laser should probably still be looked at.

Agreed. Still terrible.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 11 February 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

MPulse and SmPulse are pretty meh.

Pulse lasers are for dogfighting mechs. Lights especially can thrive on the short burn time. Other than that, the standard variants are usually better.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 11 February 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

LBX-10's are terrible.

Agreed. Needs a fix.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 11 February 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

AC/10's probably need some help too.

The midrange autocannons are in a rough spot. The AC20 is great, but there's very little reason to pack a 2/5/10.

[Deamhan]

SRM 6:

2 slot
3 tons
6 missiles per shot @ 2.5 per missile for a total of 15 dmg
4 heat per shot
3.75 cycle time to produce 4dps

Now what weapon is most comparable with regards to dmg, heat, and cycle time?

LRM 10 w/ the same cycle time and heat will do 18 dmg (4.8 dps). 2 slots (same as the SRM 6) @ 5 tons.

The LRM 10 also comes with 18 salvos per ton of ammo while the SRM 6 is 16.6r salvos per ton. Less damage overall.
The LRM can use lock, can be fired without lock but has a slower flight time. They can reach out to 1km but have a minimum range of 180m and can be lobbed over absticles as part of the flight tragectory. SRMs can't use lock and are straight fire only. They have a maximum range of 270m then they explode (unlike lasers and ballistics that can exceed their max effective range).

If anything, the mass could use an increase by one ton to bring it in closer to the LRM10 although it shouldn't match the LRM10 since the LRM10 can do more damage than the SRM6 can. One more ton per launcher can make a big difference to the A1 using 6 of them. That means 6 tons the A1 has to free up to make the boating happen.

This way, when the clan streaks come, the SSRM 6 should acutally be 3 for 4 slots and be 6 tons. While it can only shoot when it has a lock, with the new anti ECM features, getting that lock won't be nearly as difficult. With no minimum range and being a "point blank" weapon (up to a max of 270m) and with the speed at which srms travel, the extra tonnage and crit space will be an adequate balance to a clan weapon.

[Viper69]

The reason people boat is there is no incentive not to. Mech load outs were made a specific way to cover all possible battle conditions. Mechs encountered everything from infantry, tanks, aerospace and mechs. In all the mechwarrior games we had a single player campaign and boating didnt work in the campaigns because of all the other elements. However. In MWO we are only encountering mechs and as such we build them to destroy other mechs. Forcing people to bring mechs with possible load outs that they dont enjoy with weapons that are ineffectual will push more people away than boating does.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Man, the way you just compared the LRM 10 to the SRM 6 does not at all apply to current in game situations.

While I do think perhaps raising the tonnage by 1 may work, it seems like they will just skimp on a ton ammo and drop down engine levels and maybe some armor.


Problem is, Catapults hit box allows them to use XL engines with near impunity, so they will still be moving much faster than you would normally expect.

Viper69, on 11 February 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

The reason people boat is there is no incentive not to. Mech load outs were made a specific way to cover all possible battle conditions. Mechs encountered everything from infantry, tanks, aerospace and mechs. In all the mechwarrior games we had a single player campaign and boating didnt work in the campaigns because of all the other elements. However. In MWO we are only encountering mechs and as such we build them to destroy other mechs. Forcing people to bring mechs with possible load outs that they dont enjoy with weapons that are ineffectual will push more people away than boating does.

This is why I've said, objectives and maps can fix that. But PGI seems to not be interested in those aspects of the game for the forseeable future.

Right now it looks like we're getting two maps that won't really fix the problem, community warfare and a dropship mode.

But none of those add any real objectives. It just expands the brawling that we already have.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 11 February 2013 - 01:13 PM.

[Josef Nader]

Non-boat builds might become a lot more popular when team commanders can call in Aerospace or Armored support. A squad of VTOLs does a fly-by blasting everything with SRMs or a few AI-controlled Demolishers rolls into town to wreck your mech. Then you'll regret only having one type of weapon to deal with those things.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Assuming these aren't consumables that require MC, I'd love to see modules that do that. Hopefully it doesn't become a balance nightmare though.

[Z0MBIE Y0SHI]

Someone called MPL's 'meh'...

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I didn't say they were terrible. I just think they could use a pass over from a dev and some tweaks. Right now more often than not Medium Lasers are going to be chosen over them.

And of all the stuff being posted in this thread, I love that you pick that to take the time to post about an add a .gif too. ;P

[HaVoK-NoC]

if you have a prob with cata`s then buy a mech with ecm or equip yourself to counter them with 2 ultra ac/5`s

[Praehotec8]

Josef Nader, on 11 February 2013 - 12:59 PM, said:

That's what I'm trying to get at here. Dragons and Cataphracts are balanced by a healthy mix of pros and cons. The Catapult's con's column is a little too short for it to be interesting.

Honestly, your pro-con sections read more like, "Catapults and Cataphracts are balanced by a healthy mix of pros and cons. The Dragon more-or-less sucks." (I kid, I kid, no offense intended!) Which is, generally the view of many players from what I understand.

I think the current SRM-fest is more due to the current mechanics in the game (ECM making target lock more difficult, etc.). Right now, if you're a mech that can't take ECM, most players seem to feel that SRMs are the only worthwhile option. Add in that maps are relatively small, and even the slowest mech can quickly get into knife-fighting range, and the low weight, high damage SRMs are a natural choice for missle slots.

I really feel that as the game state changes and grows, that SRM boating should become less ubiquitous. I would love to see less people running splatcats in the A-1, but don't wish to have alternative variants of the A-1 nerfed just because of the 6X SRM-6 variant.

[Rhent]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 11 February 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

SRM's do need to be looked at. Arguably the best Centurion build is also a boat. 3 SRM 6's.

Stalkers are another mech that starts to get really scary when boating SRM's, especially when the pilot understands using cover on these stupidly small maps.

I think boating in general needs to be looked at. I mean look at the best mechs, it's always something like 3 Ultra AC 5's, 6 PPCs, 4 Large lasers, etc etc.

This game does not promote the build that has multiple weapon types for multiple ranges. IE 1 Ultra AC5, 1 LRM launcher, some medium lasers and maybe an SRM launcher.

This isn't tabletop, and a lot of your viewpoint could be construed as coming from a misguided fondness for tabletop. Think about this:

All weapons systems have a different firing trajectory, heat and velocity. Pilots who decide to use a mix of laser, ppc and autocannon for moving Medium to Long Range targets will have to fire those said weapons at different times to hit, causing a lowering of DPS in comparison to a player firing all of of one weapon system who can aim and fire in one shot for fire that hits the target that they want.

A better question you should be asking yourself is why should someone who is firing multiple weapons, that are inherently deficient in doing focused fire damage to one armor, should do comparable damage to players firing one weapon system? The fact of the matter is, if you use one type of weapon system per volley you will get good focused fire on target and a better kill/death ratio.

Gauss Cats, AC/20 Cats, Laser Hunches, UAC/5 Phracts, SRM Cents/Cats/Stalkers, LRM Cat/Stalkers all have an inherent advantage over mixed builds and frankly they should for kills. If someone wants to run around with AC, Laser, SRM and LRM, they can do good damage over all ranges, but don't expect to get the focused killing power of someone using one weapon system.

[HRR Insanity]

Mackman, on 11 February 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

I apologize for grouping you with the people who can't stand being able to actually aim weapons. I would actually be totally fine with your solution, with a few tweaks:

• It seems as though this would need to have some sort of scale of disruption. It simply doesn't make sense to have small lasers fired together absolutely mess up the aim of a multi-ton behemoth.

The reason is that targetting computers (for whatever reason) are bad in the future. That's why you couldn't hit things in the same place with groups of weapons... until they re-invented the targetting computer. The point isn't that it's lore, it's that grouped weapons break the armor/damage/heat model and need to be dealt with because it's mathematically impossible to make individual weapons good but not have them break when combined into a super weapon (2xAC20 = AC40).

Quote

It seems, since a stock K-2 is designed to have two PPC's, and to fire them simultaneously, that some amount of simultaneous firing should be acceptable? Perhaps it would be by location or even by whatever side of the mech the weapon is on? (firing two lasers both from right arm/torso causes dispersion, but firing one each from right and left torso/arm does not)

Stock K2 is designed to have 2 PPCs. It's not designed to be able to hit the same spot with them, making a PPCPPC that does 20 damage for 16 heat. Lots of people have proposed variations on weapon spread due to location, but it is complicated by the fact that if you allow it, there will be a 'best' 'Mech purely due to hardpoint layout. For instance, the 2xGR K2 will be the 'best' GR boat if we don't put spread on torso weapons because the hardpoints are in close proximity.

Quote

• Finally, how would this stop boating?I know this wouldn't greatly impact my 4-PPC Stalker build, aside from the fact I could no longer blow components off of cocky lights with one Alpha. It seems that this would make it harder to get pinpoint damage on one spot... but the best way to do so would still be to boat particular weapons.

Thoughts, especially on my last point?

It doesn't directly stop boating (such as your 4xPPC Stalker). But if someone fires those weapons as a group, they won't have a PPCPPCPPCPPC that does 40 damage for 32 heat. Instead, they'd have to pick and choose when to fire those shots to do damage to one location. It would arguable INCREASE the skill cap for the game substantially.

The main advantage of my proposal is that it allows the developers to tune individual weapons INDIVIDUALLY. They won't have to worry about what happens when 'Mech X puts 7 of them into play... because they're not going to combine damage to create a 'super weapon' that blows off limbs instantly. A good pilot could still chain fire those weapons to achieve the same result (blown off limb), but it would take excellent gunnery... and time. Thus, we could go back to original armor and weapon values (changed because of the boated alphastrike instant death syndrome) and suddenly fights are strategic and very skill dependent.

This is what 'MechWarrior should be.