Russ' Anti-Alpha Mechanic to Kill Ghost Heat via Twitter

I agree, let's not get our knickers twisted just yet. Still I don't like this idea, especially since adding another ressource will just lead to more unwanted and unnecessary complexity.

 

I will eat EVERY BIT OF CROW for misleading people! Please god, just tell me I misunderstood the Tweets! (stupid twitter crap)

 

i think it will be implemented like in good old MW2 times... remember? Honestly, i'm not a fan of it, even though i loved MW2.

Here is some detailed fodder (pretty old the suggested idea ):
http://www.qqmercs.com/one-year-later-a-sensible-update-to-ghost-heat/

Quote:

 

No. Don't calm down, expect the absolute worst. If we don't voice our concerns then pgi will just think people are OK with it. They will waste dev time on this trash.

We should show them we absolutely hate their trash idea, but are willing to see how they could modify it to make it work (tbh I think it should just be scrapped, but whatevs).

@blagg the alpha idea is sub par. Mostly because why boat weapons if you can't fire them? If you have to sit there and basically wait in-between firing then you may aswell drop those weapons for a gauss or something to up your alpha instead of wasting tonnage. Thanks for the idea, I appreciate the brainstorming. I just don't like it haha.

@ReconSaint not only will this potentially kill kodiaks. But if it goes in the way it is currently perceived, it could kill mwo lol. Even if it doesn't it'll just be a waste of dev time, unless pgi randomly manages to do it right, which is basically impossible when you consider their track record.

 

Well said. Totally Agreed!

Not sure if you really got my "simple" Alpha Damage Penalty Concept. Read again my post on page 1 pls. It does not say that you can't alpha strike boated weapons together, but rather you can not deal full Boating-Damage when Alpha Strike. It was a suggestion to deal with insanely high Alpha Strike Damage, so to take away the Instant Kill Power of some broken builds.

Here are some examples of broken builds:
4x PPC Stalker
6x SRM6 Splatcat
2x AC20 Boomjager
2x Gauss Gaussjager
9x MLas Hunchback
6x M(P)Las Jenner
...
2x cERPPC + 2x cGauss Direwolf

Ghost Heat did not work, because smart Players still can play very effective Peek-a-boo and dissipate heat behind cover (just takes longer than pre-Ghost Heat Era). Or they just mix Weapons of similar attributes (range, projectile speed) to the Alpha Strike like 2x cERPPC + 2x cGauss (yeah i know many Players loved to do this and will do everything to go against any nerfs to these broken builds).

Alpha Damage reduction based on the Boating Count of high effective Weapons is one way to deal with broken builds.

Examples for the broken builds:
1x PPC = 10 damage
2x PPC = 18 damage (20 minus 10% Alpha penalty)
3x PPC = 24 damage (30 minus 20% Alpha penalty)
4x PPC = 28 damage (40 minus 30% Alpha penalty)
=> 4x PPC Stalker Alpha Strike = 28 instead 40 e.g. against CT or ST or Rear, or 4x 10 damage in Chainfire (but % spread damage because of target movement)

1x Gauss = 15 damage
2x Gauss = 21 damage (30 minus 30% Alpha penalty)
=> 2x Gauss Jager Alpha Strike = 21 instead 30 e.g. against CT or ST or Rear, or 2x 15 damage in Chainfire (but % spread damage)

Let's say the Penalty Numbers are the same for the Clan Equivalents cERPPC and cGauss
e.g. for the Direwolf 2x cERPPC + 2x cGauss =>
1x ERPPC = 15 damage
2x ERPPC = 27 damage (30 minus 10% Alpha penalty)
1x cGauss = 15 damage
2x cGauss = 21 damage (30 minus 30% Alpha penalty)

27 damage + 21 damage = 48 Alpha Strike Damage instead full 60 (Instant Kill in many situations!)

note: Penalty Numbers are just Examples! Not really balanced!

Yeah, Boaters will cry loud, but well, what actually do we the community want? Do we want to keep having Broken Builds at Full Damage Power? Do we want to keep the game at OP Peek-A-Boo Style?

Alpha Strike Damage Penalty also has its own Flaws - because it is again some kind of Ghost Effect, which is not transparent to new Players, and also not easy to balance each weapon system against the other. Also when i fire 6x ERMLas + 6x ERMLas (Nova) with just a short desync of 0.5s, does the Penalty apply or not? It's sub par, that's for sure, but it is a way to decrease the broken effectiveness of some broken Boats aka Alpha Strike Power on a very direct way and not over workarounds via other parameters or additional resource system (high complexity -> even more risk for bugs).

-------------------------------------------------
Allrite, if you don't like the Alpha Strike Damage Penalty concept, then how about "Balancing the Alpha Strike with a reactive reticle" aka Anti-Weapon-Convergence? (also old idea, which i very supported)

pictures tell more than 1000 words:

 

I read the original post pretty thoroughly.
My issue remains. Why carry extra weapons, if using them doesn't really benefit you? Consider the stock hunchback 4p, why should it have so many medium lasers if when it alpha strikes only 6 would deal damage? Instead it should just drop those mlas, for larger engine or more dhs and basically be a 50 ton, slower Jenner lol. Pretty much all systems that people theorize to punish alpha striking or high alpha builds almost entirely leave lights unaffected.

If all mechs except lights are being affected that's not good. If assaults could no longer field a high alpha then lights should have theirs scaled accordingly. Why if a 100 tonner is limited to say a 40-50 damage alpha, should a 35 tonner be capable of 30+. But since lights generally achieve that via 6 mlas or mdpls. They would not be punished offensively, allowing lights to basically hit like mediums, while being faster, and if quirks stay in place any of them with bad hitboxes will have quirks to basically make them as durable as a medium.

@The weapon convergence change ideas, of basically any sort. Everyone who supports them will deny it. But they kill skill requirements. I realise this isn't "csgo" or "cod", but I still want a level of difficulty to any game a play. But if aim is practically removed from the equation, so that everyone is just standing still in an attempt to fire, that ruins it.

In no way would that help the game. The hyper advanced targeting computers, gyroscopes, and interfacing with the pilot should allow mechs to fire pretty damn accurately. If they have to stand still to fire accurately, then why not just use 100 ton tanks in their place? They can mount more armor, no need for actuators and all those space wasting systems.
But I don't want to play another world of tanks, with mechs where I have to wait to fire and then still have pretty decent deviations from POA.

The game doesn't need longer ttk, or any diminished skill requirements. They need to quit getting ideas like ghost heat or the new one and stop muddying the waters. One of the biggest reasons that new players have problems is the systems that they put in place that barely even state their existence.

IMO with the current state the game is in. Removing ghost heat wouldn't cause any severe issues. If you think about it for just a minute. There is only 2 builds thatd be potentially problematic. One, 6 erppc direwolf and the other maybe, 6 lgpls direwolf. Neither would be a huge problem, they would be able to alpha relatively rarely and would still be pretty hot builds. Plus the only mech capable is the direwolf, a slow 100 tonner, with bad hitboxes. Also known to carry the heaviest loadouts of any mechs really.

But besides those builds what would create issue? 6-4 ppcs surely wouldn't. Lasers can provide the same or higher alpha now for less heat and better dps. Gauss + ppc combos, meh would be stuck to sniper role pretty much exclusively because except for cERPPC. Gauss and ppc really don't go well together atm, with how crippled both weapons are (gauss is still top tier, but in comparison to what they used to be, and ppcs are garbage unless super quirked). Running something like 8 mlas really wouldn't be problematic, never has been. 5 lgpls would be a strong assault build again, but still not OP. Would be kept in check by the many other assault and heavy builds.

I'm all about making the game better. But losing features, losing customization, and losing boating are all things I'm against. Especially because boats are super popular in lore.

Just to cap off my spew fest, when was the last time you were 1 shot killed, or 2 shot? Recently I've been on an absence, not by choice but by restricted Internet access. But before that, I can't even remember the last time I was 1 shot. Running around in a Jenner or firestarter right before my absence too, even when I was right in the middle of probably 3-8 mechs it took a good bit for them to pick me apart, I was never notably 1 shot. Maybe from behind once, but you should be easily possible to 1 shot from behind ( me especially since I run 1-2 back armor max).

 

@POOTY: You are correct, the reason you've not been one-shot recently is because PGI decided that was a bad thing and has put multiple systems in place to try and prevent it, including doubling of armor values over TT and the liberal use of +Armor/+Structure quirks. They've also made cockpits conspicuously small enough that skill doesn't factor into hitting a cockpit most of the time, luck and splash/sustained damage do. I'm more than a little confused by you explicitly agreeing that being insta-gibbed is a bad thing but then dancing quite the dance to say "no. totally, we need more insta-gib in the game". You don't actually address pinpoint damage, just alpha/burst with no actual context to expected armor, structure, or spread of damage. This makes it more than a wee bit difficult to take you seriously when you say "The game doesn't need longer ttk" and "Removing ghost heat wouldn't cause any severe issues." You outright state the real problem is lack of clarity, but then talk about scrapping the mechanic entirely as if you DIDN'T just say clarity was the problem rather than even entertaining ideas that increase clarity to new players (visual and audio indicators, tutorial about the mechanic, etc.).

I'm doubly confused because you mention "Especially because boats are super popular in lore." You sure, broski brokowski brokowanowski? I'm going to ask you to back that up. I don't claim to have read much of the fiction, but the info I DO have about stock loadouts, named custom variants by a lore pilot, and descriptions of both mercenary and official companies runs pretty counter to that assertion. But like I said, I know my info in this regard is woefully incomplete, so by all means educate me (I always want to learn new fun things about the lore and books I need to pick up for my reading pleasure).

To be clear: I DO agree that skill should be accounted for and that random negative convergence runs counter to that, and that TTK should be more openly talked about rather than just assigning "good/bad" status to longer or shorter, since the debate is often reductive without really addressing game health. And, as you mention, often ignores differences between weight classes and how this should be accounted for in balancing! But negative convergence based proportionately to hardpoint location is a system that could be toyed with, and recoil/jitter concepts shouldn't be dismissed out of hand either, etc. Regarded critically and held to high expectations with regard to clarity, intuitiveness, and player skill cap? You betski. But your talk of simply scrapping all the crepe you don't agree while ignoring the context is equivalent to saying "It's only a fallacy if PGI does it, not if I do it." Sorry, not sorry, but that's not going to fly.

 

Well more accurately one Dev didn't like getting volleyed by the other team when he crested.... *facepalm*

 

Well, your answer again confuses me. About 1 shot killed etc.. well, maybe it will happen very often, if we allow no limits for Max Alpha Strike Damage Builds. The Problem we have here is a game with no real respawn unlike many other Online-Shooter Games. To make the game fun for casual players (which usually should be the big majority base to keep the game active alive) you need to handle the broken builds. If you say 5LPls are no problem... well, let's see if everyone is gonna boat again, because if Player A has the way more powerful build (Boat), why should Player B take out some inferior build (Mixed)? Will be again like - u r a troll for the team, if you don't boat. Have fun!

Short answer: I disagree in many points, simply because throwing back MWO back to stone-age is neither a solution to make the game accessible for PUGs but also competitive for Units/CW. Looking at something we read about some yrs ago: https://www.themittani.com/features/mwo-king-alpha

 

@karl -
Boating makes lots of sense in lore, for the reason that boating a single weapon meant you needed less manufacturing plants, instead of going to 3 different ones for you energy, laser, and missiles, they just take it all from same factory. I'm amazed you would challenge the idea of boats. Hell humans do it all the time in the military irl.
List of lore boat mechs:
Every Phoenix hawk IIC (2 uac10, 2 mgs or 4 lrm20s or 2 heavy ll, mdpls, 2 smpls)
Mad dog (6 srm6, 1 erppc, 1 lbx5)
Salamander (3 lrm 20 assault mech)
Longbow (2 lrm 20, 2 lrm5)
Vulture mkiii (4 lrm20, 6 ermlas)
Every awesome pretty much (3 ppc stock variant and a 4 erppc variant with ecm lolol)
Blackjack (4 mlas 4 flamers)
Hunchback 4p (8 mlas, 1 smlas)
Flashman (3 LL, 6 mlas)
Jenner (6 mlas)
Jenner iic (6 missiles)
Supernova (6-8 erll?)
Direwolf (must I even continue?)
Kodiak (srsly)
Charger (have I proven my point?)
Jupiter (like pls just understand)
Firestarter (tons of mechs are boats)
Pirahna (12 mgs! 20 tonner! Then a 12 micro laser variant! Srsly, 12 weapon 20 tonner!)

"I'm doubly confused because you mention "Especially because boats are super popular in lore." You sure, broski brokowski brokowanowski? I'm going to ask you to back that up. I don't claim to have read much of the fiction, but the info I DO have about stock loadouts, named custom variants by a lore pilot, and descriptions of both mercenaryand official companies runs pretty counter to that assertion."
Hope that's enough evidence to change that silly thought and disbelief.

Oh and brubakers nightstar runs 2 gauss, 3 lgpls. Pretty meta build from mwo, some would consider that a boat.
But others like thunder hawk(3 gauss)
Devastator (2 gauss, 2 ppc, 5mlas)
Gunslinger (2 gauss, 4 mdpls, 2 mlas, 1 smlas?)
Battlemaster
Srsly there's lots more, go read up sarna if you wish. Oh and Nova comes to mind, then the Nova cat, catapult, stalker, like cmon.

Tbh, I hate compromises. Compromises never make both sides happy. They're like you wanting to go down, but she doesn't so you dry hump. She still has to stop was she is doing, and you feel like a retard doing it. Same thing with compromising with devs of your favorite game. I'm not gonna want it half assed. IDC what they try, bit if it in any way diminishes quality or could diminish quality. I'll question it. If they said tomorrow they were removing ghost heat entirely (not replacing) I'd still be skeptical, I'd look at both sides and consider which I'd prefer. But I definitely prefer true aim, over literally any other version that diminishes skill in any way, one of the reasons I, and most recent players hate lrms.

@blagg -
Just because boats are effective doesn't mean people won't run mixed builds lol. They will run what's effective. Ofc nobody is gonna run stupid garbage like 1 lrm10, 2 srm6, 1 smpls, 1 lgpls, 1 uac10. That's a trash build, nobody should ever consider it. But heck, they may really like 2 gauss, 2 lgpls, 4 mlas dires. There isn't much of a boat to compare to that, and if you call that a boat I'll poop. A dire, for all its mounts, would actually be filling less mounts than a stock build with that loadout.

Again to just beat the dead horse. If 2 uac10, 3 uac5 does more dps for less heat. Then people will run it over 4 uac10, whether ghost heat is around or not, the slightly more mixed build is better.

 

Sure, the Noobs? Cannonfodder for Boats?

Boats?

No it is not a Boat, but do you admit that the Alphastrike Damage is insanely high?

Online’s major balance problem is the sum of dealing more than X points of damage to a single location in a single click, while you don't even need time to aim and hit precisely. I guess you can remember the scenarios where you peak over a ridge and get instantly hit by distance of more than 700m to the enemy shooter. Why even buy Targeting Computers if you don't really need them to target&hit in less than a second, manually?

To repeat what is said often in the past:
Separately, neither massive alpha strikes nor convergence is a bad thing. Together, however, they create a nasty scenario where a couple of clicks is enough to vaporize an opponent. It’s bad, both in terms of gameplay and from a Battletech lore standpoint. There’s absolutely no incentive to fire two shots at 20 damage when you could fire one for 40 damage.

 

Yes 2 gauss, 2 lgpls, 4 mlas is a big alpha. But also yes it is limited to the heaviest of mechs, runs hot, and can be absolutely obliterated by a single SRM medium mech (shd 2k, or grf 3m used to be my favs).

No, I do not think me getting punished for peaking over a hill is a bad thing, and no you do not get hit instantly at that range. Depends on the ability of the enemy pilot, and whether you previously peaked in that spot, sometimes you can have 4-5 seconds of peaking a ridge without return fire.

Yes there is incentive to fire 2 shots of 20 damage vs 1 of 40. Rate of fire, range, and dps. You silly geese must forget that boats generally lack high DPS, especially laser boats. Maybe they have good short term, but sustained is rarely over 5-6 dps.

So what would I use to face a super duper scary OP high alpha 2 ac20 mauler? 4 uac5 mauler, enormous Rof, superior range, superior dps (massively), and it sounds cooler when fired. Idk if you know this but ballistics and srms are phenomenal counters to high alpha laser vomit. They can engage in situations where you don't want to normally engage with lasers. You don't heat up as quickly and during a shorter time deal more damage.

Don't even start crying about SRM alphas. 6 srm6 catapults right now are ripe for the crippling and tossing aside. The only time srms were ever OP was when a single SRM 6 did 18 dmg and the broken splash. But even a 6 srm6 cat, with what a 77.46 alpha or something (off top of my head)? That thing doesn't actually hit all that hard, it will punish you for making mistakes, but can easily be defeated with superior aim and patience.

I don't think you guys even want a fighting game. You guys just want a mech walking simulator, where you occasionally fire at each other. Sorry I don't have time for ttk to be 1 min per person. I wouldn't even have time to get in games, and nor would most.

The skill cap for this game isn't even all that high, you are rewarded though for superior aim, effort, and time put into the game. But wrecking aim, and taking away any negative affects from a major tactical mistake like peaking a ridge with mechs on the other side, is just plain nonsensical.

Why did you guys stay with mwo so long if these alpha builds had been so broken? If you were getting killed so very quickly, you must've been super duper mad. So why didn't you drop the game and move on? That's right, because it never really was a huge issue. Yes ppc boats were problematic, yes SRM boats were very destructive. But neither was invulnerable. Ppc boats sucked up close, and SRM boats sucked anywhere over 270 meters. You could do well without carrying either weapon system, so I'd call that fine balance.

Tldr:
Why shouldn't you be punished for messing up?
You could deal pinpoint damage on all other MW titles except maybe 1 and 2.
Firing 20 damage twice vs 40 damage in one shot are both effective. You are just blind to ballistics platforms I guess.
Not to mention all the one shots in lore, pickup gray death trilogy, pretty sure there's 4-6 one shot kills in there. So why should that never ever ever occur in mwo? Hell arty strikes one shot me all the time lolololol.

 

Well, then we probably make different ingame experiences. I really had matches where i just peaked over a ridge to check the situation and BAM got hit in the CT with a full Double Gauss or something similar (Alpha Strike), not even previously peaking in that spot. I doublechecked where the Enemy was - he was sniping from distance of 700m+ because i could lock him. Maybe he could forecast, where his enemies would peak out of experience. But the fact that you can always pinpoint-hit with converged weapons at where you aim your crosshairs even at high distance, this is simply broken. Whether or not it was my fault to make myself visible or not. There must be a difference of accuracy of fire depending of the distance - you can't tell me that this is ok - accuracy of fire/alphastrike-pinpoint-convergence at any distance. This simply feels unnatural and is no good for gameplay fun. I'm not expert in the Lore, but i do not believe that in Lore you can always pinpoint-hit your targets at any distance. Why having Targeting Computers MKI - VI ? Doesn't make sense.*

On a open battlefield, 1v1, you are damn rite - high DPS builds would definitely crush a low DPS Alpha Strike build. But generally spoken Alpha Strike Builds are way more effective, since you can always use cover to shorten the time of visibility - peak-a-boo style. You can spectate this phenomenon in quite any Online-Battlegames - high Burst Damage with precise accuracy is most times King. Read again section Calculus: https://www.themittani.com/features/mwo-king-alpha

The Catapults are rarely played in the current increment, simply because they are inferior to many of the newer Mechs. But you still can play extremely powerful SRM Boats with Clan Mechs. Take away Ghost Heat and you will meet a lot of SRM Boats again on the battlefield like in old times where the Splashcat was once a Meta Build.

Now you are sounding contradictory - higher TTK = more brawling fun, shorter TTK = occassionally fire at each other with instant kills or Kills in some few Volleys, Peak-A-Boo-Style. Higher TTK doesn't mean the Brawl should take forever. It should be balanced that Alpha Builds should not be the superior way to dominate the battlefield. If you don't believe this - just open a poll and ask the other players. The community can tell you what is true on the battlefield.

There are many reasons, even though the game is still so broken after so many yrs. One would be - we are Mech-Sim Fans, there are no real alternatives atm. Another - we are die-hard-MW-Franchise fans, and even in the darkest hour we still keep hope for the MW-Titles. Another could be - we are Collectors and really love to config our babies in the Mechlab and occasionally take them out to test them. Not really playing competitively. Whatever reason, we still can make our opinions/suggestions to make the game better.

I'm not sure how long you are active in the MWO game. I think we all know that many many many good old MWO backers and early-adopters and founders and Clans etc. already quit the game, or don't play it anymore in the way they played (competitive/casual). Actually we now have a second or third generation of playerbase (esp. since Steam Launch). Ask our Site-Founder Michael - he could sing a song about the Development and all the Flaws of the game. As a Veteran Player i only want the game to stay alive until the next MW Incarnation is implemented and we could switch over. And so we really want to help make the game be good for new players and also veteran/competitive players. To make this possible you absolutely have to make compromises. MWO has a steep learning curve, so is difficult enough for new players, because e.g. you can't find all the needed infos ingame, you need to go to smurfy or mechspecs etc., it does not need any further difficulties, rather some simple but good concepts like "easy to play, difficult to master". MWO is not at this point in the current version, still not. This is pretty sad. But we still hope that PGI can make it better.

We should be punished for messing up. Punishment should be hard for beginner's mistake, for very dumb actions like running solo into the enemy team, going into CQC with a Missile Boat. But Punishment should not be unforgiving by just not having the same Alphastrike-Pinpoint-Damage build like the enemy, who can peak-a-boo snipe-alpha-shoot your CT reddish, before you can do anything to defend yourself.

Pinpoint yes, but Snipers should take time to make the perfect shot, not only just peak-a-boo and hit like a Flash with high accuracy. Alpha Strike yes, but should have a tradeoff, not simple 1Click-Winbutton. But Alpha Strike + Pinpoint with no real difficult aiming skill (just buy/use a very good mouse - easypeasy **), i'd say NO.

Firing 20 damage in two volleys gives the enemy time to react. So no, it's not the same effectiveness. This is a proven concept. No way you can have the same TTK-Effectiveness.
Simple Calculation: A CT has 40 Health left - what kills faster? And yes, i love Ballistic Platforms and i love playing them, more than the simple 1Click-Win Builds. Simply google for the Texas Chainsaw Massacre Build..

I'm not saying that 1Shot-Kills should not occur in MWO. The Fact that most Mechs have big visible Cockpits should have mean that in the Lore 1Shot-Kills should have occured very very often. But it is not. Why? I assume aiming requires a lot of skill, a lot more than in MWO, where Players could run Poptards easily. If Pinpoint-Convergence was not implemented as Default, then MW would make a lot more Fun for both the Casual PUG players and also the competitives, because you could really work on your stats, like:

"Easy to play, difficult to master."***

*

Spoiler: Targeting Computers - why?

http://battletech.rpg.hu/mechfactory_frame.php?call=mechtech_equipments&selected_eqid=49

**

Spoiler: Why is aiming so easypeasy in MWO, and in Battletech-Lore not?

*** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushnell's_Law

 

The game seems to be the most balanced that it has ever been. Why reinvent the system now?

If this kills the Kodiak, they will have a bigger PR sh!tstorm than the Ghost Damage Debacle.

Think of all the great things they could be doing with this dev time.

If you really want to increase TTK, make IS XLs equivalent to Clan XLs. Think of all those guys in the trial Catapults.
Or maybe PGI could allow IS players to buy Clan engines separately and burn more steamers c-bills. Installing a Clan XL in an IS mech could negate any quicks of the chassis.

 

It's very hard having discussions with people of different skill levels. Your viewpoint is that even dual gauss is a high alpha. Really can't help you there. What do you expect mechs with 2 long range, low dps, explosive rifles to do? You want them to chainfire while taking 3-5 seconds to aim and fire between shots?
Sorry, you're wrong.

That article about csgo and Eve comparisons just looks like alot more whining. He even stated at one point the difficulty of aiming with the maelstrom. In csgo you are rewarded for better aim while using those weapons, the article forgets to mention that awps are the only weapon that can 1 shot via torso hit. The deagle, AK, and m4 all require headshots to one shot otherwise. So those weapons reward skill, I don't see an issue? Higher RoF weapons are plenty popular in csgo aswell (m4 is a notable one), skorpion in blackops ii, the feline in crysis, needler, assault rifle, and smgs in halo, etc. Across the board, competitive shooters heavily crutch themselves on the highest dps weapons. That doesn't mean sniper and missile launchers aren't useful and without role. In some instances like mw2 (modern warfare) they can even be taken too far, like the infamous Noob tube. Doesn't mean they should be crippled altogether, just not a sure 1 shot.
So basically that article is whiny bs, and both high DPS and high alpha weapons are viable.

Regarding you being hit by DUAL GAUSS RIFLES! AT 700 METERS! SEEMINGLY INSTANTLY?!?!?! Wow such broken, so op, pls nerf. Do you even know what gauss is? In mwo gauss has a projectile speed of 2000 m/s, meaning with unquirked gauss, for you to be hit at 700 meters it'd take the projectile 35/100ths of a second to arrive. You've got to be kidding me if you're whining about being hit by gauss. Especially at 700 meters, do you know how close that is to hit a target that's ~15-20 meters tall? Considering modern tanks could hit one another at about 2500 meters consistently that's really no big deal. Especially with a weapon that has no percievable bullet drop. That's the entire point of gauss, to be able to hit targets at extreme range with superior accuracy anf consistency compared to other weapons.
You shouldn't be here about alphas. You are just mad about gauss. Start threads about removing gauss not removing alphas. Plus your perception of how long your exposure was means nothing. Especially if you were peaking a ridge, in most mechs you are exposing your upper torsos or arms about 1-3 seconds before your cockpit crests a ridge, so that dual gauss dude had plenty of time to spot, charge, and fire. Also have you ever seen any sniper movie, like ever? You never want to peak over stuff or be ontop of a ridge, especially against a horizon. It makes you the easiest target possible. You always want to hover below the horizon to minimize exposure, and peaking in between or around stuff is always better. Peaking overtop is literally telling the enemy where you are.
Mystery spotted and solved!

The topic of my experience and time with mechwarrior. I started with mechwarrior 3, then played mw4 vengeance, black night, and mercs. Even mechassaults, then mektek, then MWLL, and now mwo (since December 2012). Read something like 10 of the battlemech novels, read plenty of other material like technical readouts, keep up with sarna mechs, etc. So I'm semi-well equiped to discuss the topic. Not as well read or immersed as some others I know. But I'm also alot more sensible than most of them lol.

Topic of targeting computers. IMO they have no place. Requiring them go improve weapon accuracy in a shooter game is a trash idea. Players themselves fill that role. This way a player isn't limited by how big of a TC they mount, but by the skill with which they pilot their mech. In lore they make sense, fits with all the other technology and helps distinguish certain chassis. But for mwo they shouldn't be actual equipment, it should be assumed that all mechs have a targeting computer, makes sense, but for a skill rich environment equality makes sense there.
Put that to rest hopefully.

Back to the high DPS loadouts or high rate of fire vs high alpha or super burst DPS.
A huge disadvantage that alpha builds have, is facing multiple opponents. A 4 uac5 mauler is very adept at facing down 2-3 opponents at once, and can and will win 2 on 1 fights. A dual gauss, 2 lgpls, 4 mlas dire will hit one of the three really hard, but will most likely leave it alive. After which the direwolf will be at at least 50% heat and probably only fire 1-2 more times before being obliterated. When they can choose the terms of engagement they can obviously win most fights, but same goes for just about every build.
Understand? If not I can explain another way.


"Easy to play, difficult to master."
I think you want this game to be like skyrim, I want this game to be like darksouls. You want to just run around swinging your sword or whatever weapon you have and still have fun and do well. I want to have frustrating messups, but come back, try something different, improve my timing and aim, and dominate. You want to collect all the items in game, I just want the ones pertinent to my success.

There are alot of ways to play this game, but maybe the new battlemech game or the old mechwarrior tactics would suit you better.

 

Nah, pls come down from your ivory tower and talk fair. Even if we are people of different skill levels, we should discuss this brand hot topic with manner and show appreciation for each others points of view.

If we talk about Heavy Mech Class, e.g. a Jagermech from a Min-Maxing Point of view, i guess yes - Dual Gauss is one of the most effective builds with a great Alpha+Range+Pinpoint, that's why it is such a popular classic build. Another would be 2x AC20 with limited Range. What i was criticizing was not only the Damage aspect solely, rather was the very effective combination of high Alpha Damage + Pinpoint + Targetaim Speed compared to other viable mixed builds. Why did PGI nerfed Gauss Rifles anyway (i still hate that loadup), if boating them was never an issue for the players? I think not.

never thought of that, and no Sir, i don't aim for something like that. But don't you think Aiming & Hitting with a Long Range hard-hitting Cannon should have it's specific Skill Requirement different than using other kind of shorter range Cannons, just for balancing? Long Range = Time to aim with Reward for it, Short Range = Fire&Forget, etc.

I think you see the wrong side of my described scenario. The Gauss Bullets should fly at high velocity due to Lore, but the combination of quick aim + instant bullet hit seems to be pretty op. Have two or three such Snipers focus-shoot you, i believe that kills you faster than any multiple DPS platforms.

You are focusing on the given example with Gauss. I could have named examples with PPC, or ERLLas or LPLas or any kind of long range cannons as well. I was talking about the ability to aim & hit precisely in a very short time window of under 1sec just using a good mouse. This feels very unnatural in a Mech-Sim. In my understanding of a Mech-Sim, Manual Controls with Joysticks should be really challenging.. but should it be easy like using a Mouse??

The Comparison with modern tanks (i guess the real ones) is just broken - if you say MWO should reflect that, then your PC should aim for you with deadly precision - like having an Aimbot. We agree both that Aimbots aka Targeting Computers are not really good for the gameplay. On the other hand we are talking about a game, where the majority of the playerbase shall find pleasing fun & entertainment, not hard reality & frustration. Ok, you are the Darksouls type, i got it.

I have a different opinion, even though as mentioned Aimbots with Mouse Control is simply silly. Imagine MWO requires you to use a Joystick, which is never as accurate as a Mouse, which should always be a bit imprecise to simulate the shooter’s own lurching motions, muzzle recoil and other environmental conditions.
That means in my understanding everyone could fire and hit somewhere at the opponent in CQC, but for real precise shots you need to be either very talented (has a very steady hand, good eyes etc) or got an assisting system like Targeting Computers (lore-compliant), but as we both agree Targeting Computers aka Aimbots are trash for a Mulitplayer-Mouse-Controlled-Shootergame.

Depends on the situation. On open battlefield the DPS build can dominate, because he can keep the target on his crosshairs = gets time for the same damage. On non-open battlefield the Alphastrike build, especially the ones that also has range capability, can strike harder and take cover. If you can face the enemy at constant direct line of sight the DPS ofc can win the fights. The question is not if one DPS Build can take on more Opponents at once, or the Alphastrike Build. The Question is, which of them can take out the enemy faster!

You might be right - maybe the game suits better for you, maybe that explains why there are so much uproar in the community, unlike the really good scores for darksouls from its community - different expectation for this game?!

BUT - all joking aside - the real question is not whether i want this game to be like skyrim, or if you want this game to be like darksouls. The crucial question is what the Community (the Majority of MW Players) expect this game to be, so that this game can be function with Matchmaking, Community Warfare, further Development = needing Playerbase-Support etc.

My personal question to you - why does it definitely has to be Either Or? Why not something inbetween Skyrim and Darksouls, so that both (Casual Players/Competitive Players) can both have fun? Why even exclude the Skyrim Players, or the Darksouls Players?

See the Big Picture - MWO is intended for all MW Gamers, not only specific types. We talk about Balancing, right? Do we really expect this game to keep having game mechanic exploits (e.g. Gauss/UAC-Macros, game exploit oriented builds like the mentioned Alpha Strike Pinpoint, or the classic Poptart etc.), where gameplay can become very frustrating? Sorry, i don't think you can easily talk about different skill levels, especially here in MWO, where balance is broken.

 

I didn't include the opening statement as an insult. Just saying, we aren't of the same style or skill level, so our POVs are hugely different.

The issue with catering to the masses, is you lose top end quality. CS was never like, ah new players are getting wrecked because the ttk is too short and they keep getting one shotted. They try to make the game so that it rewards skill, rewards experience, rewards you for putting time into a game. Plenty of people play WoT which has a way worse learning curve and grind compared to mwo, and is much more punishing per tier (not skill tier, but tank tier).

The real fix for improving bottom end player happiness is dividing the skill tiers. Hard matchmaking walls. The issue with that is purely population, being a small F2P PC exclusive isn't a great way to get your name out there.

Potentially instead of a system like quirks we could do something like mech tiers. For example there is tier 1-3, 1 best, 3 is dragon. So basically only a certain number of each can make it into a match. Tiers wouldn't be based on weight class, but weapon mounts, engine cap, hitboxes, and hardpoints.

Example of system in action:
Team 1:
Banshee (1)
Stalker (2)
Mauler (1)
Catapult (2)
Urbanmech (3)
Crab (2)
Spider (2)
Locust (3)
Dragon (3)
Firestarter (1)
Arctic cheetah (1)
Ebon Jaguar (1)

Team 2:
Atlas (2)
Atlas (2)
Awesome (3)
Timberwolf (1)
Warhammer (1)
Ice ferret (3)
Stormcrow (1)
Jenner (1)
Jenner (1)
Adder (2)
Koshi (3)
Rifleman (2)

They could basically balance on a per mech basis, without actually giving any mechs advantages or disadvantages. This would get rid of quirks and just rate on actual mech ability. Would probably require some more hitboxes fixes, but IMO this would be one of the best ways to balance.

Group queue you ask?
Similar to world of tanks, limit group size (not as drastically) but probably to 8 players. Then just give a group an average tier based on their mechs or keep player tiers for group queue and average the skill of the group to determine teammates and opponents.

Getting rid of alphastrikes just kills a play style, and basically kills boating with it. A build style supported by lore, and a huge part of the game aswell. Limiting customization and variety with it.

I'm still entirely against anything limiting a players aim. My comparison of a tank irl accuracy vs in game, makes sense. In place of the tanks "aimbot" is a human, capable of error and his abilities determine his limits. Plus forcing everyone to basically use joystick would be terrible, as a mech pilot would be assisted by a targeting computer. So by us having uber aimbot mice, that is the balance for not having targeting computers, but if you cripple everyone, that's just no bueno.

Also like I said about the alpha vs dps build topic. It is all about terms of each engagement. Sometimes the alpha build is in its choice setting, other times it gets its face melted for stepping out in the open too long. But to answer your question about which build should win faster, the answer is almost always a DPS build. A 4 uac5 mauler has something like 20 dps sustained (in my experience and calculations over hundreds of matches in solely that build). So really unless the alpha build either 2 shots the enemy mech, or 1 shots, the DPS build should win. But then the topic of situational engagements shows up again.

We will see what happens after the new system goes in. But IMO any major modification to boats or alphas is terrible and more game breaking than alpha builds or boats existence.