179 replies to this topic

[Tennex]

Zerethon, on 13 February 2013 - 11:27 AM, said:

In competitive, anyone with LRM's is also running TAG and backup weapons.

My personal C4 for instance, has 2xASRM6, 2xALRM15, TAG, and a medium laser.

If ECM doesn't get on me, i can TAG and rain shots on open targets and totally ruin a defense line and force them to draw back

If ECM gets on me it has to watch out for the SRM/ML Spank and if it starts to run, it also has to watch for potential LRM fire. Not to mention teammates.

Essentially, if more pugs bothered to learn tactics and stop trying to play this as countermechstrike online the games would be a lot better. But they've been babied into easymode all their life.

can people not do math? you are breaking your backs for a 1.5 ton item. that takes up 2 critical slots.

[Mackman]

I'm fine with permanent destruction. But can people really say that the AC20 shouldn't be a bit more durable? As it is, it's almost guaranteed to be disabled as soon as the armor is breached, This leads to a hugely disproportional amount of wasted tonnage in ammo and the component itself.

A possible fix for this would be to make one of the Atlas perks to be a +whatever to the longevity of ballistic weapons mounted on it, or something like that.

[Bryan Kerensky]

Tennex, on 13 February 2013 - 11:29 AM, said:

difference between me and you is i don't take lie to myself when i'm taking advantage of something broken

No the difference is that I don't lie to myself when there is something I can do to defeat it. Haha, but seriously, a barbed personal attack means nothing to me especially since we've been talking about beating it. But oh well, apparently ECM affects our ability to manually aim with direct fire weapons!

Tennex, on 13 February 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

can people not do math? you are breaking your backs for a 1.5 ton item. that takes up 2 critical slots.

No it just doesn't really matter to us. Whether I use it or not, which I usually do not since I play mediums and heavies most often, I know I can beat it easily. But oh well whatever helps you sleep well at night right? haha

Edited by Bryan Kerensky, 13 February 2013 - 11:35 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Kylere, on 13 February 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

TLDR: OP wants items to not be destroyed.

My response: Meh

Tell me, why does an AC/20 need to be more easily destroyed than 4 Medium Lasers that deal the exact same damage, have instant-hit and the same range, that only cost you 4 tons, instead of 14.

I know why it might be fair in the table top game. That 20 damage in one single blow was just murderous, and those 4 medium laser would have spread their damage like mad across the enemy mech. But this isn't the table top game, as people like to tell me. THis advantage doesn'T exist. Those 4 medium lasers hit exactly the location you're aiming at, just as the AC/20 does. As a bonus, it comes with explosive ammo.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 13 February 2013 - 11:34 AM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Tennex, on 13 February 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

if you want this game to be competitive. at least give players a chance. when faced with these items. you say adapt. but how will a LRM boat adapt when there are ECM mechs on the field(in a pug setting, since most new plyaers will be)? the only way to adapt is to not use LRMs. and thats just not good gameplay nor is it very balanced.

If you "boat" anything, you are playing the edges of performance optimization to one extreme or another. If you go full LRM and are bull-rushed and can't maintain range, that's a mech-design limitation you've imposed on yourself compounded by the tactical error of not maintaining range. Don't build a Mech that's essentially a one trick pony and then complain when people counter it. Same with a S36 splatcat.....you build a Mech so thoroughly optimized that its essentially got one viable trick (the 270m and below...and lets face it, its lower than 270m SRM attack) and then think there's something unfair about people staying out of range?

There's not a single weapon system or tactic in this game that cannot be countered with some patience and common sense, including splatcats, gausscats, jumpsniping 3D's, 6PPC stalkers or raven 3L's/ecm-mando's with streaks.

[Zero Neutral]

zverofaust, on 13 February 2013 - 11:09 AM, said:

I'm amazed that this permanent destruction of Mech components at complete random is still around as an integral part of this game, a feature seen nowhere else in the entirety of even mediocre competitive game titles.

Let me drop a very simple, infallible truth: Having random, permanent and game-changing effects in a competitive multiplayer game is one of the most blatant taboos imaginable in the genre. There's no getting around that fact.

Please stop adhering to this ridiculous, inappropriate and out-of-place gimmick from a 30 year old tabletop strategy game. I'd really like MWO to be successful and it's heading down the right path, and you guys have made some very awesome improvements since October in tweaking and overhauling various aspects of the game with that goal in mind. But these hold-overs do nothing to benefit the game and serve as little more than blunt obstacles to both casual enjoyment and serious competitiveness, and it's time to re-evaluate their implementation.

With that in mind, here are some generalized suggestions on how the system can be improved:

• Temporary Effect: The loss of functionality of the damaged equipment is temporary.
  
• "Analog" or Reduced Impact Effect: Rather than the arbitrarily "binary" aspect of the feature that determines whether a piece of equipment is "working" (1) or "broken" (0), have a more "analog" approach where functionality of the equipment gradually degrades the more it is damaged. Absolute destruction is unnecessary, as this result is obviously achieved by destruction of the component housing the equipment itself.

I like the idea of "battle damage"; it indeed adds more depth to combat than simply giving every Mech a healthbar to chew through. But in a competitive online game with no respawning or "reset button", having permanent, random events heavily affecting your Mech adds nothing to gameplay -- on the contrary, it takes from both the casual and competitive aspects of the game by frustrating people with arbitrary unavoidable dice-roll gimmicks and making real competition no more legitimate than a game of dice. There is no way for a player to "play around" or adapt their playstyle to losing a weapon. It's simply gone.




Temporary or Reduced Impact effects on the other hand allow players to adapt to random but manageable battlefield conditions. It confronts the player with adversity whilemaintaining his ability to overcome that diversity, by adjusting their playstyle, tactics and strategies to this new condition, and thereby expands upon the tactical and strategic aspects of the game where the current dynamic allows nothing but solemn indignation and begrudging acceptance of the player's unavoidable fate.

Thank you for your time.

Signed,
Zverofaust

Tennex, on 13 February 2013 - 11:19 AM, said:

so why did they nerf it in such a manner. and i don't know about you but i get 500-700 damage with gausskat and 2-4 kills per game

Because the Gauss cannon's HP was too high for the way that it has been in every other MechWarrior game. Now it's back to normal, not re-balanced. Now there is a clear choice between AC/20 and Gauss Rifle.

Edited by Zero Neutral, 13 February 2013 - 11:48 AM.

[Death Weasel]

So let me get this straight.
If a component or weapon gets damaged, you think is should only be slightly damaged but still function at a reduced rate?
I disagree.
If you fire a rifle with a damaged barrel or chamber you run the risk of having it explode and cause serious damage to the operator. (Friends of mine have lost body parts from instances such as these.)
A high capacity, high rate of fire, high power weapon that malfunctions would destroy large parts of the vehicle it is mounted on. Autocannon rounds and missles would explode in their tubes probably resulting in a chain reaction. In this case your mech would literally consume itself.
Respectfully,
Lil ol me.

[Vapor Trail]

Enig, on 13 February 2013 - 11:14 AM, said:

EDIT: Also, why add a signature to your post when you already have a signature attached to your post?

I don't know if he's being ironic... or what.

http://mwomercs.com/...gn-their-posts/

[Tennex]

Bryan Kerensky, on 13 February 2013 - 11:33 AM, said:

No it just doesn't really matter to us. Whether I use it or not, which I usually do not since I play mediums and heavies most often, I know I can beat it easily. But oh well whatever helps you sleep well at night right? haha

then you are in no position to say anything about ECM. i'm not someone QQing about being beaten about it. I use it, and it just doesn't make sense how much value you get for that 1.5 tons.

sure i play against ECM and do fine. it doesn't even bother me.. but its not even remotely balanced compared to other items of 1.5 tons. the decision to take AMS or BAP or 1 more heat skin. or medium laser. is non existent on an ECM mech.

Edited by Tennex, 13 February 2013 - 11:39 AM.

[Zero Neutral]

Tennex, on 13 February 2013 - 11:27 AM, said:

even if ECM ruins the use of 1 item. it is OP. split hairs till u got them coming out of your *** it don't make a difference.

even if just 1 item; LRMs can no llonger be effectlively used with the presence of a 1.5 ton item on the field.

I disagree completely.

Without ECM, there is no electronic warfare. ECM is the component that imitates electronic warfare attacks, without it, there is no such system, and instead just components that gives bonuses. ECM is the component that provides the detriment to certain weapon systems, that otherwise, have little to no detriment.

ECM can be countered with TAG, PPC, (very soon,) other ECM, Sensor modules, and more in the future most likely.

It adds a huge layer of strategy to the game, and in fact, one could simply choose to ignore trying to counter ECM completely since it only affects two weapon systems... that's right, you're griping because it affects two weapon systems, even though it can be countered.

I think that a lot of pilots actually have trouble figuring out how to counter ECM. I don't think that balance should be done around people who just can't figure things out.

Please do us all a favor and get over the fact that it takes up 1.5 tons and two crit slots... HOW BIG DID YOU WANT IT TO BE!? So big that no one could fit it on a mech ever? It has to be small enough for a light mech to equip... just stop.

Tennex, on 13 February 2013 - 11:38 AM, said:

then you are in no position to say anything about ECM. i'm not someone QQing about being beaten about it. I use it, and it just doesn't make sense how much value you get for that 1.5 tons.

sure i play against ECM and do fine. it doesn't even bother me.. but its not even remotely balanced compared to other items of 1.5 tons. the decision to take AMS or BAP or 1 more heat skin. or medium laser. is non existent on an ECM mech.

Are you kidding me? Given that ECM can only fit on CERTAIN MECHS, why would a pilot NOT TAKE ECM ON THAT ECM RESTRICTED MECH!? STOP! No one ever thinks to themselves, "Hmm, I could take another medium laser or this ECM," that is just so naive. ECM is on the mech WITHOUT A DOUBT NO QUESTIONS ASKED because it is an ECM RESTRICTED MECH. Players sacrifice leg armor to put an ECM on, not weapon sytems... I am done with ya.

Edited by Zero Neutral, 13 February 2013 - 11:43 AM.

[BlackSquirrel]

Getting your weapons blown off or the ability to do so is awesome, and adds a deeper layer to gameplay.

Both for meta, and actual in game.

Also posting in a ZF thread... I/We should know better.

[Bryan Kerensky]

Tennex, on 13 February 2013 - 11:38 AM, said:

then you are in no position to say anything about ECM. i'm not someone QQing about being beaten about it. I use it, and it just doesn't make sense how much value you get for that 1.5 tons.

Haha, when I say I usually do not, I still do run in often enough. Oh and I am certainly in a position to say anything I want about ECM. Who the hell are you to tell me what I can or can't say? I fight against and with them every time I play MWO. I've used ECM in my DDC to assist my team mates. I've fought against 8 man teams using nothing but ECM mechs so I am perfectly qualified to say whatever I want.

The value has blown itself out of proportion in my honest opinion. Now more than ever ECM mechs (particularly Ravens) are getting a taste of treatment from people who have learned how to deal with them, and not simply wallow on the forums crying out because of their own inability to make a change.

Pathetic.

Edited by Bryan Kerensky, 13 February 2013 - 11:44 AM.

[Noodlesoup]

haha.. random damage.. hahahahahaha.. he wants this to be like Call of duty where you can get hit by bullets and lose zero of your combat capability until your health meter = 0. next he'll be asking for health regeneration for battlemechs during a match. or maybe give the commando a first aid kit he can drop for an AOE heal.

fyi, getting shot where your gun is isn't RANDOM. in fact, you're lucky that you *randomly* might not get your weapon destroyed immediately when someone hits it due to the critical slot mechanic implemented. there are few other games that implement location based damage because it's difficult to do well and balance, not because it's anti-competitive.

+1 troll

[GT Hawk]

Is it just me or are people having a hard time now looking for things to complain about. I like the current setup, especially considering random is part of war. and its not the first game to have some form of random. For example several games have had random gun jams, anoying as all hell when you should have had the kill but it makes for a more interesting game. So its a FACT (you seem to like to state facts that are false) that other games have random change built in. In war there is always a chance some luck shot will take out a jeep, or that RPG that should take out the jeep dose not. So why not have it a little here. In the end it still takes X amount of damage to take out a CT and that's it.

I agree not all table top rules translate well but in the end you need to realize the MWO and all other MW titles come from the initial TT games. Dose not mean you need to understand the TT rules but at least realize TT came first. So a balance of TT rules and new design is what is needed. Calling the original rules crap and saying they should not be followed is just dumb. Ie if we don't at least stick to some of the TT rules and such, then it would not be battletech. If that's what you want, go play another game that's not battletech and enjoy. WOT is fun I heard.

OP arguments are poor at best.

Edited by GT Hawk, 13 February 2013 - 11:53 AM.

[zraven7]

This makes perfect sense. When the mount holding a weapon is blown to shrapnel by an explosive projectile, the weapon should still work, albeit in a somewhat reduced manner. I mean, if I were holding a gun, and someone were to blast my hand and the gun with a 10 gauge shotgun full of double-ought, the gun would work fine, just floating there. Given, it would do a little less damage....

Edited by zraven7, 13 February 2013 - 11:48 AM.

[Zero Neutral]

zraven7, on 13 February 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

This makes perfect sense. When the mount holding a weapon is blown to shrapnel by an explosive projectile, the weapon should still work, albeit in a somewhat reduced manner. I mean, if I were holding a gun, and someone were to blast my hand and the gun with a 10 gauge shotgun full of double-ought, the gun would work fine, just floating there. Given, it would do a little less damage....

Sigh.

Edited by Zero Neutral, 13 February 2013 - 11:49 AM.

[Bryan Kerensky]

zraven7, on 13 February 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

This makes perfect sense. When the mount holding a weapon is blown to shrapnel by an explosive projectile, the weapon should still work, albeit in a somewhat reduced manner. I mean, if I were holding a gun, and someone were to blast my hand and the gun with a 10 gauge shotgun full of double-ought, the gun would work fine, just floating there. Given, it would do a little less damage....

I'm guessing you're being sarcastic so, I won't say anything.

[Zerethon]

Tennex, on 13 February 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

can people not do math? you are breaking your backs for a 1.5 ton item. that takes up 2 critical slots.

And it's beaten by a 1-ton item that takes up 1 crit slot and i'd use anyways because it lets me focus the damage of my LRM's more usefully.

Can people not use logic?

Besides. I'd be carrying the SRM's and ML anyways because fast mechs of any volition (Dragon, lights, mediums) that can close in to within 180 pretty easy would still be a problem for me even if ECM didn't exist and i could just boat LRM's all day.

I don't like the idea of only having a pair of medium lasers to fend off something that can carry many times that firepower and get close with ease.

Edited by Zerethon, 13 February 2013 - 11:53 AM.

[Bounty Dogg]

MustrumRidcully, on 13 February 2013 - 11:33 AM, said:

Tell me, why does an AC/20 need to be more easily destroyed than 4 Medium Lasers that deal the exact same damage, have instant-hit and the same range, that only cost you 4 tons, instead of 14.

I know why it might be fair in the table top game. That 20 damage in one single blow was just murderous, and those 4 medium laser would have spread their damage like mad across the enemy mech. But this isn't the table top game, as people like to tell me. THis advantage doesn'T exist. Those 4 medium lasers hit exactly the location you're aiming at, just as the AC/20 does. As a bonus, it comes with explosive ammo.

I dont usually participate in threads like this, as they tend to get heated......but Mustrum, I hold your posts in too high esteem to not question this one. You have a good grasp of the in game mechanics, i think, so you know that the way you just described MLs and the AC20 as working in TT is pretty much the same way they work here. The only difference is instead of the laser spread being determined by random chance, its now determined by Pilot steadiness Vs. moving ability of the enemy mech, which, in the case of the 4 MLs that do damage over time, amounts to a similar instance of NOT doing full damage on the same component. Where as the AC 20, just like in TT, is delivering the most SINGLE COMPONENT focused damage in the game to one spot. I'm not taking a stance for or against the OP, but had to address this.

[Clay Pigeon]

AC/20's component HP could stand to be boosted, given how it's a damage magnet once armor is stripped.